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

Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

futureoflife.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 139 posts

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#31

Post by Normille »

cm2187 wrote: post #22
chaosbolt wrote: post #2

>Because you invaded a country for no reason (like we did to Iraq), (except the one you invaded is at your borders and we put our guy at its head a couple years ago, and the one we invaded is half a planet from us), we will bring forth the apocalypse. Humans are crazy, seeing how we're speaking about a nuclear war now vs how people spoke about it in the 60s, it's like a mass psychosis, we don't care anymore, or maybe…

I am struggling with the alternative. So a dictator can invade any country he wants because otherwise he can say "booh, nuclear apocalypse" and because we can't risk to be anywhere near that, we need to give the dictator whatever he wants? And the invaded country has to swallow it? It's easy to write off other people's freedom. This map is very the reason why Putin's threats are empty threats. The US, UK and France h…

Logically then, you should approve of Iran and North Korea having nuclear weapons. Because, otherwise, they might leave themselves open to invasion by some 'bully' [mentioning no names].

In fact, let's give every country in the world nuclear weapons. Then no-one will dare to attack anyone else and peace will reign everywhere.

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#32

Post by marvin »

chaosbolt wrote: post #2

>Because you invaded a country for no reason (like we did to Iraq), (except the one you invaded is at your borders and we put our guy at its head a couple years ago, and the one we invaded is half a planet from us), we will bring forth the apocalypse. Humans are crazy, seeing how we're speaking about a nuclear war now vs how people spoke about it in the 60s, it's like a mass psychosis, we don't care anymore, or maybe…

I have no idea who you are quoting. But bowing down to nuclear threats increases the chance of nuclear war. This is because it will cause more nuclear threats in the future, and also strongly incentivize most non-nuclear countries to acquire nuclear weapons.

We currently see NATO provide very stern back-channel warnings against nuclear weapon use to Russia. This is deterrence, which again decreases the chance of nuclear weapon use.

Similarly, providing military support to countries that are invaded decreases the risk of future invasions all over the world, since it makes the cost that much higher for someone who wants to achieve their goals by military force.

We can all agree that the Iraq war was a terrible mistake, and that the United States has made many such mistakes. But the current support for Ukraine's self defense is a completely different sort of situation, and has little to do with allegiance to any particular country.

It does also support the USA's geopolitical interests as a side effect, which is why the US is so strongly involved, but the deterrence effect is the main reason it's important. It serves the same goal you're aiming towards -- long-term peace and trade, and ensuring nuclear weapons are never used.

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#33

Post by _visgean »

rjzzleep wrote: post #26
_visgean wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who are you quoting? > we put our guy at its head a couple years ago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Ukrainian_presidential_el... this is denying that ukraine has agency of its own. Nobody put a guy anywhere. He was elected. > we will bring forth the apocalypse. The only country that is threating 1st strike is Russia.

Quoted post unavailable.

Here you go https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/30/putin-annexati...

> literally begged NATO to do preemptive nuclear strikes against Russia 3 days ago

he did not say that these strikes be nuclear https://kyivindependent.com/news-feed/zelenskys-staff-forced... but also it matters very little as UA has no nuclear weapons (because it gave them to russia for teritotial guarantees which turned out just great...)

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#34

Post by kolinko »

RagnarD wrote: post #23

The list includes Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland (!), Ukraine (!), (east) Germany (!!!), and so forth. To state that this 1956 target list "probably doesn't look dramatically different [from today's]" is one of the most moronic things I've read in a long time.

As someone living in Warsaw, Poland right now - my assumption was that the list looks the same, just the nukes would fly from the other direction.

Also, it is surprisingly uplifting - I always assumed nukes would hit the city centre - especially since we have the government officials stationed here. But it looks like the only two targets were airports.

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#35

Post by rjzzleep »

eecc wrote: post #5
chaosbolt wrote: post #2

>Because you invaded a country for no reason (like we did to Iraq), (except the one you invaded is at your borders and we put our guy at its head a couple years ago, and the one we invaded is half a planet from us), we will bring forth the apocalypse. Humans are crazy, seeing how we're speaking about a nuclear war now vs how people spoke about it in the 60s, it's like a mass psychosis, we don't care anymore, or maybe…

mostly agreeable except for the premise that Ukrainians should be a passive lot that either should’ve resigned themselves to remain an impoverished, looted, vassal state like Belarus or Russia itself, or are acting as a pawn in US geopolitical hands. They — seemingly — aspire to more than that.

There was nothing passive about this. There was a clear peace plan and Ukraine refused to implement any of it[1][2].

December 2020 there was to be a discussion on the matter in the UNSC but Germany and France refused it, which were actual guarantors of the peace plan.

[1] https://www.ibtimes.com/minsk-ceasefire-deal-full-text-agree...

[2] https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2016/09/13/...

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#37

Post by admissionsguy »

chaosbolt wrote: post #2

>Because you invaded a country for no reason (like we did to Iraq), (except the one you invaded is at your borders and we put our guy at its head a couple years ago, and the one we invaded is half a planet from us), we will bring forth the apocalypse. Humans are crazy, seeing how we're speaking about a nuclear war now vs how people spoke about it in the 60s, it's like a mass psychosis, we don't care anymore, or maybe…

> except the one you invaded is at your borders and we put our guy at its head a couple years ago, and the one we invaded is half a planet from us

I know neoconservatism went out of fashion after Iraq, but the US-dominated system thrives on making everyone freer and the world more open, and it's a good thing. Coup or no coup, expansion of the US sphere of influence is good, and expansion of the Russian influence is bad, it's that simple in my view as an Eastern European (as it is on the eyes of the vast majority of people liberated from the Soviet/Russian world).

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#38

Post by stareatgoats »

hackerlight wrote: post #21
ptr wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if it’s the Internet’s fault. Maybe people have become so jaded by Online discourse and carry it over into IRL?

Also people in the 60s lived through a nuke (1945) and lived through WW2. That living memory is now gone. The problem with the "anti-war" crowd right now, is many appear to be closet Putin supporters. Or at least they're so anti-American that they support Putin by default. It would help the anti-war people not in that camp to carefully disambiguate between wanting to reduce the risk of nuclear conflict -- a laudable…

> many appear to be closet Putin supporter

This is the eternal paradox of being anti-war: if you are advocating peace in a polarized situation you are essentially aiding and abetting the enemy. The anti-war movement really only has one window of opportunity: in a non- or low-polarized situation create strong trade ties, international agreements and intercultural understanding and hope that it can fetter the always active belligerents on all sides to a sufficient degree. When the polarization reaches a certain level (sufficient number of people killed or maimed on both sides and the killing frenzy rhetoric has taken hold) all we can do is go silent and watch as the world goes down in flames.

The most realistic hope is likely that there is a new window of opportunity to build on thereafter when the horrific memories of war are still live in memory.

But there is of course always a desperate, albeit likely unrealistic hope that people in charge will come to their senses before it is too late.

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#39

Post by TEP_Kim_Il_Sung »

avgcorrection wrote: post #11
TEP_Kim_Il_Sung wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we will bring forth the apocalypse. This word is often misused. Are you still worried about someone bringing it forth, now that you know what it means? apocalypse (n.) late 14c., "revelation, disclosure," from Church Latin apocalypsis "revelation," from Greek apokalyptein "uncover, disclose, reveal," from apo "off, away from" (see apo-) + kalyptein "to cover, conceal" (from PIE root *kel- (1) "to cover, conceal, sa…

What’s the objection here?

I am not saying people are dumb for using the word, just that it is impercise, and there are better words, such as Armageddon, cataclysm, and holocaust. (The latter being specifically destruction by fire)

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#40

Post by flohofwoe »

KingOfCoders wrote: post #6

"it probably doesn’t look dramatically different" Living in East Germany I hope it does!

It's interesting how it's mostly scattered small towns in East Germany, not large cities (with the exception of the Berlin city center). For instance Altenburg, which is closest to the village I grew up, so naturally I checked that first. It's a completely unremarkable little district town today with an airfield for hobby pilots, but apparently this airfield was a Soviet military base during the Cold War:

https://www.mil-airfields.de/deutschland/flugplatz-altenburg...

Post reply on HN