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

Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 165 posts

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#31

Post by gonzo41 »

hef19898 wrote: post #23
nine_k wrote: post #19

Belarus regime being what it is, I'd not think that the referendum actually reflects people's opinion, and the result was not predetermined. OTOH I suspect that after the events of 2014 and 2022, Ukraine will remain the last country in history to willingly give up nuclear weapons. Many more countries will think about developing an deploying their own nukes, or at least staying one step away from actually producing th…

That's one of the lessons, isn't it? First the West reneged on the Nuclear deal with Iran, now Russia invaded Ukraine. All the while North Korea is just simply left alone.

NK is not really left alone. They face very tough sanctions daily. But I agree, broadly I think there will be an arms race for nuclear weapons amongst the smaller asian countries.

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#32

Post by hef19898 »

gonzo41 wrote: post #31
hef19898 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one of the lessons, isn't it? First the West reneged on the Nuclear deal with Iran, now Russia invaded Ukraine. All the while North Korea is just simply left alone.

NK is not really left alone. They face very tough sanctions daily. But I agree, broadly I think there will be an arms race for nuclear weapons amongst the smaller asian countries.

Sanctions, sure. But no real military conflict, or attempted regime change by anyone, since the end of the Korean War. NK is at peace with its neighbors (meaning direct military conflict) almost as long as Europe is (ignoring the non-EU countries for now).

On top of that, the nuclear arsenal allowed NK to get away with a ton of human rights abuses and all the other shit, like shooting missiles over Japan, for decades.

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#33

Post by throwaway6734 »

hef19898 wrote: post #23
nine_k wrote: post #19

Belarus regime being what it is, I'd not think that the referendum actually reflects people's opinion, and the result was not predetermined. OTOH I suspect that after the events of 2014 and 2022, Ukraine will remain the last country in history to willingly give up nuclear weapons. Many more countries will think about developing an deploying their own nukes, or at least staying one step away from actually producing th…

That's one of the lessons, isn't it? First the West reneged on the Nuclear deal with Iran, now Russia invaded Ukraine. All the while North Korea is just simply left alone.

Iirc NK also has the backing of China and has a ton of conventional arms aimed at Seoul which would cause mass casualties

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#34

Post by pelasaco »

hef19898 wrote: post #23
nine_k wrote: post #19

Belarus regime being what it is, I'd not think that the referendum actually reflects people's opinion, and the result was not predetermined. OTOH I suspect that after the events of 2014 and 2022, Ukraine will remain the last country in history to willingly give up nuclear weapons. Many more countries will think about developing an deploying their own nukes, or at least staying one step away from actually producing th…

That's one of the lessons, isn't it? First the West reneged on the Nuclear deal with Iran, now Russia invaded Ukraine. All the while North Korea is just simply left alone.

I think what he meant was that in 1994, in the Budapest Memorandum, it was decided that Ukraine would hand their nuclear weapons to Russia over and in return Russia promised never invade Ukraine. Interesting that the fact that it could be a mistake was raised back in the days already: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Ukraine#De... I would be interesting to find out what the other "experts" said back in the day.

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#35

Post by javier2 »

sharikous wrote: post #27
dstick wrote: post #13

It seems that the only option left for Putin is the "nuclear" one (no pun intended) now that the whole world is seeing that the Russian army lost its morale, and its teeth. Old equipment, young soldiers that are harder to brainwash than in the old days. It is fascinating to see for the first time in the modern age what effect modern media consumption and the internet has on a local war. While it is undeniably true th…

> It's harder to mobilise people behind a corrupt cause once blood starts flowing. I don't know how significant it is. Dictatorships have always been feared and despised. And armies lost motivation many times in history, before the internet. From a military perspective what I think is different this time is how (probably) US intelligence is helping Ukrainians. It seems they know any Russian move in advance in real ti…

Same.

While it is still a bit unclear to me at least why Russia sent their seemingly old gear without proper support and young conscripts in first, the terrible parachute attempts still stand out.

When you want it to be over quickly, you have to send in the best soldiers with the best gear first to seal the deal?

In addition to live NATO intelligence, it is clear to most europeans that US intelligence tried to warn about this at the start of December, with photos showing large preparations for heavy army movement all around the Ukrainian border.

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#36

Post by trompetenaccoun »

tasubotadas wrote: post #18
megous wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other options for Russia are always negotiation and withdrawal. It's not like there would be an counter-attack.

For Russia? Yes. For Putin? No.

That depends entirely - what was the goal of this attack in the first place? Did he think he could quickly take Ukraine and the West wouldn't interfere? It's possible. His soldiers look unmotivated, even unprepared though.

Maybe it's part of a larger strategy. We might see more crisis popping up soon.

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#37

Post by hef19898 »

pelasaco wrote: post #34
hef19898 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one of the lessons, isn't it? First the West reneged on the Nuclear deal with Iran, now Russia invaded Ukraine. All the while North Korea is just simply left alone.

I think what he meant was that in 1994, in the Budapest Memorandum, it was decided that Ukraine would hand their nuclear weapons to Russia over and in return Russia promised never invade Ukraine. Interesting that the fact that it could be a mistake was raised back in the days already: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Ukraine#De... I would be interesting to find out what the other "experts" said back…

Yeah, turned out that was mistake (or was it really?) almost 30 years later. Back the day the world was different. The former USSR countries were dirt poor, military hardware was sold left and right wholesale. The USSR was utterly defeated. So for everyone, it was much saver to have only one, potentially failed, state having the USSR's nukes instead of multiple ones. And it worked for almost 30 years, so back then it made sense for everyone. That might change going forward. Or might not, way to early to tell.

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#38

Post by robertlagrant »

jansen555 wrote: post #20
dstick wrote: post #13

It seems that the only option left for Putin is the "nuclear" one (no pun intended) now that the whole world is seeing that the Russian army lost its morale, and its teeth. Old equipment, young soldiers that are harder to brainwash than in the old days. It is fascinating to see for the first time in the modern age what effect modern media consumption and the internet has on a local war. While it is undeniably true th…

Pollonium and thermobaric bombs easily come to my mind. Funding terrorism on steroid making Iranian look like absolute kindergartener are something I immediately think of after the previous 2 options. I can probably write a master thesis in an afternoon for possible options Putin can take. Imagine people doing this kind of think tank on daily basis for Putin. Remember when Soviet were dirt poor then they can match US…

> Remember when Soviet were dirt poor then they can match USA militarily, Russia now is sig ificantly richer with more sophisticated weapons

They were poor, it's true. Tragically, because they were a centrally planned economy, the USSR could starve its citizens to funnel wealth to its war machine.

Russia is richer (about as rich as the state of Florida) but less centrally controlled, so it will find it harder to concentrate wealth into state initiatives at the expense of the lives of its citizens.

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#39

Post by dtech »

hef19898 wrote: post #32
gonzo41 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NK is not really left alone. They face very tough sanctions daily. But I agree, broadly I think there will be an arms race for nuclear weapons amongst the smaller asian countries.

Sanctions, sure. But no real military conflict, or attempted regime change by anyone, since the end of the Korean War. NK is at peace with its neighbors (meaning direct military conflict) almost as long as Europe is (ignoring the non-EU countries for now). On top of that, the nuclear arsenal allowed NK to get away with a ton of human rights abuses and all the other shit, like shooting missiles over Japan, for decades…

I think it's simplistic to just put that on "NK have nukes". They also have support from China, who want them as a buffer and don't want to deal with the refugees from the state collapsing.

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#40

Post by b112 »

hef19898 wrote: post #29
godmode2019 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your take is very surface level, its like you are looking for faults. Assaults on massive countries are not won overnight. USA had a quick win of a month in Iraq by using shock and awe. Blowing everything up and killing any civilian who got in the way. This created a massive insurgency, which was fine because they didn't plan on occupying only destabilising. Russia plans on occupying, to reduce NATOs ability to out f…

For a country not planning to occupy, the US lead coalition sure stayed for quite some time.

I think maybe parent is maybe combining info from the first and second invasion into one.
Post reply on HN