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

51–60 of 139 posts

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#51

Post by Normille »

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.

  >The only country that is threating 1st strike is Russia. 

  >All of Putin's speeches are available in english on the kremlin website.
Shh! --you're spoiling the doublethink. It's the same as how the energy crisis has now become "Russia turned off the taps" when, in fact, Europe decided to shoot itself in the foot by refusing to buy Russian gas, beforehand.

Now "Russia has threatened to use nuclear weapons" when, in fact They never said any such thing. There were just some vague threats to use whatever means necessary [or similar] to defend 'their people' in Ukraine.

Even after BBC News [Nation Shall Speak Propaganda Unto Nation] played Putin's speech [with overdubbed translation] where he pointedly DIDN'T mention nuclear weapons at all, the newsreader summarised the speech by saying Putin had "threatened to use nuclear weapons"

It really is like living in Orwell's 1984 these days. Consequences are quoted as initiating actions and even when we're [rarely] allowed to hear what Goldstein actually said, we're officiaslly informed that he said something else.

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#52

Post by jotm »

flohofwoe wrote: post #40
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…

Some of the most specialized companies in Germany have their production in small unremarkable towns (that still have a huge Edeka or Lidl lol).

If you want to stop the production of nuclear warheads, you cripple the factories that make high pressure, special alloy cooling pipes for example.

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#53

Post by _visgean »

rjzzleep wrote: post #35
eecc wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/...

lol are you saying that UA is reponsible for breaking the peace? You mean the country that got invaded? By the country that guaranteed its territorial sovereignty.

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#55

Post by einpoklum »

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…

> So a dictator can invade any country he wants

Let me guess: You live in the US.

For most people in the world, the situation is that the US, and possibly some neighboring regional power, can invade whenever they want; and at best we can offer limited initial resistance and guerilla/terrorist attack once they've occupied.

But "with food comes appetite": The US government has normalized, among its citizens, the presumption of military intervention where and when it likes. That is deplorable. What's worse, though, is that it can stretch the same trick as far as nuclear war. That is, most US'ers seem to be willing to risk the destruction of all humanity because " 'We' can't let the dictator-of-the-day invade this country we don't care about and can probably not even place on a map!"

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#56

Post by keewee7 »

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…

>and we put our guy at its head a couple years ago

>we will bring forth the apocalypse

Your comment is pushing Russian lies about the 2014 revolution in Ukraine and the only one bringing apocalypse closer is Russia.

As a European with many Polish and Ukrainian friends and coworkers I'm happy that libertarian isolationist Americans only have a say on Hacker News and r/Conspiracy. The world would be a worse place if American libertarians had a say in foreign policy.

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#57

Post by notthatmccarthy »

stareatgoats wrote: post #38
hackerlight wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ac…

> 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.

There is no such paradox. True patriots simply do not want their beloved countries to bloody their hands with the murder of foreign people. Not to mention with the total annihilation of the entire human race.

Of course those who are opposed to the war should protest. "People in charge" don't just come to their senses. Democratic societies especially have mechanisms in place to ensure that there's no need to wait for anyone to come to their senses. If elected leaders are abusing their power to murder and destroy, those elected leaders can be replaced, legally and democratically and without much fuss. That there is fuss is only the result of those people clinging to power and not wanting to let go. But the rest of us should fight to take power away from their hands. We should not let mad, bloodthirsty assholes keep power.

If you don't want your country to go to war, if you don't want your country to bomb foreign people, if you don't want your country to use its "nuclear deterrent" to start, or compound, a nuclear holocaust, then protest. Protest as if it was a very important thing, because it is a very damned important thing.

And btw, this applies to Russians also. You're forgetting, in your "paradox", that a Russian anti-war movement exists and that its people protest and don't give a dime about "paradoxes". And they're not even citizens of a democratic country that makes special space for such protests in its legislation. They're persecuted and beaten up and put into jail. But they protest because there is no other way.

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#59

Post by Normille »

flohofwoe wrote: post #50
rjzzleep wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

It really doesn't make much sense to lookup Putin's speeches, because as became obvious over the last couple of months, as soon as he's opening his mouth, a lie comes out.

  >It really doesn't make much sense to lookup Putin's speeches...
It does if you're arguing not about whether what he said was true or not, but whether he eactually said what you're accusing him of saying.

  >as soon as he's opening his mouth, a lie comes out.
So, just a regular politician, then.

But wait! --It's like one of those logic puzzles then. So, if everything he says is a lie and he says he's goiung to use nuclear weapons... then that means he's NOT going to use nuclear weapons.

Hurrah! --we're saved!

Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map

#60

Post by thombat »

XorNot wrote: post #4

This site doesn't seem great - their methodology doesn't explain how they reach the conclusions they did. For example, does radioactive fallout scale linearly with bomb size? I have no idea! But given that most weapons are hydrogen-bombs now, that doesn't seem intuitively obvious that it does - the amount of radioactive material per warhead plateaus while yield goes up and up. Which is to say, it seems big on the "pa…

For low-altitude detonations much of the fallout comes from irradiated dirt. For example the Baker nuclear test was the first sub-surface nuke and resulted in heavy radioactive contamination of the test ships.

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

Post reply on HN