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

Why I think there's a one-in-six chance of an imminent global nuclear war

lesswrong.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 123 posts

Re: Why I think there's a one-in-six chance of an imminent global nuclear war

#111

Post by sgt101 »

ck45 wrote: post #52
Beltiras wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly why dictators never retire. They would always be a thorn in the new rulers side.

They do retire, but in exile From https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/688225 > Exile has been the second most common fate for dictators who lost office since World War II See https://www.upf.edu/documents/2873379/2873034/Dictator_JOP_O... for a list of dictators and their destinations from 1946 to 2012

I was thinking of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikita_Khrushchev#Life_in_reti...

Re: Why I think there's a one-in-six chance of an imminent global nuclear war

#112

Post by jacknews »

beachy wrote: post #105
jacknews wrote: post #83

I think the west needs to avoid being over-zealous in this fight, and let's face it we are heavily involved. This war seems to be quite personal for Putin, and if he is pushed back too hard, he may act irrationally, or be ousted, and then who knows what chaos may ensue. Europe should accept that cheap Russian gas is history. And so, a long drawn-out stalemate in Ukraine is maybe the best course, for everyone except R…

> And so, a long drawn-out stalemate in Ukraine is maybe the best course, for everyone except Russia and Ukraine. Imperialist thinking. Why should Ukrainians accept having their country invaded? Why should they just put up with it because of some imaginings about how the world as a whole would be more stable if they bowed down to the dictator? Screw that. Putin in a wild card, a megalomaniac. You can't reason with or…

It's their country, they should fight, but why should we?

Of course the loss of life is horrific and we should absolutely do what we can to help stop that, but apart from that moral concern, we're really helping because of the bigger picture of containing/punishing a bully, and deterring similar action from others like China, NK, etc.

Given that we're helping because of the wider implications, we should have a clear idea of what that bigger picture is, and calibrate our help in support of strategic goals.

Putin, and the Russia allied with him must fail, but that does not necessarily mean a battlefield defeat, in fact they will lose hardest through exhaustion.

The west, particularly America, too often gets sucked into the 'sport and glory and winning' of these situations, and Zelenski is understandably egging it on.

Re: Why I think there's a one-in-six chance of an imminent global nuclear war

#113

Post by 1letterunixname »

I don't know this author and I don't know where they pulled these numbers from. It comes across as "Strategic Nuclear War Planning for Dummies."

- Ukraine isn't in NATO and won't get in before this war concludes with Putin losing. No NATO, no automatic aid, and no WW3.

- The US is outspending Russia's entire defense budget by orders-of-magnitude with HIMARS for Ukraine (artillery: the god of war). It's only a matter of time before Putin's military refuses to take orders.

- Putin's generals would sooner remove him that start WW3 beyond a few tac nukes.

- Tac nukes aren't going to start WW3 except push Russia further beyond DPRK pariah status. Lots of fallout, lots of people will need to move out of the way in a hurry depending on the winds, but brinksmanship escalation by the West would be suicidal/omnicidal.

- Putin is seeking a 1989 do-over and resentment over Afghanistan, but it's going to follow a similar result. Putin is, in recent years, doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

- Putin likely has cancer since an oncologist has been following him around.

- It's plain to read the nonverbal communication of Putin's inner circle whenever they appear on camera: they're wondering how they can get rid of him. Putin's altered mental state is somewhere between 'roid-rage, low T grouchy old man, and cabin fever from living in a bunker in the Urals separated from society for too long. Unstable crazy person with nukes.

The likelihood Putin will be arrested or assassinated when he tries to order a nuclear strike seems the most likely conclusion.

Further reading: Ellsberg's thesis in book form: "Risk, Ambiguity, and Decision".

Re: Why I think there's a one-in-six chance of an imminent global nuclear war

#114

Post by Raemon777 »

kkfx wrote: post #61

Mh... A site named lesswrong who can't be seen without JS...

...seems false? At least with noscript on I can still see the site. (disclaimer: I work on the site. There's definitely reduced functionality if you don't have JS enabled, but surprised/confused if you can't see stuff at all)

Re: Why I think there's a one-in-six chance of an imminent global nuclear war

#115

Post by mysecretaccount »

1letterunixname wrote: post #113

I don't know this author and I don't know where they pulled these numbers from. It comes across as "Strategic Nuclear War Planning for Dummies." - Ukraine isn't in NATO and won't get in before this war concludes with Putin losing. No NATO, no automatic aid, and no WW3. - The US is outspending Russia's entire defense budget by orders-of-magnitude with HIMARS for Ukraine (artillery: the god of war). It's only a matter…

> It's plain to read the nonverbal communication of Putin's inner circle whenever they appear on camera: they're wondering how they can get rid of him.

As much as it would be nice if it were the case, this is extremely nebulous and more likely just projection/wishful thinking.

Re: Why I think there's a one-in-six chance of an imminent global nuclear war

#116

Post by inawarminister »

trasz wrote: post #97
anon84873628 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please elaborate on this with regards to China?

Russia is world’s last colonial empire. The two reasons to allow it to keep its colonies (ie most of the territory east of Moscow) was to keep it as a force stabilizing the region and to prevent them from being claimed by China. Now it’s no longer useful in the former role, as evidenced by conflict in Armenia, and if China pivoted to the West - given that Russia is a clear loser - it might not make sense to pursue th…

How is China pivoting to the West? Just last week we have Canadian parliament denouncing China for running extra-territorial "service stations" staffed by policemen in Ottawa.

And you have OPEC+ saying "No." to Biden and the White House repeatedly.

Re: Why I think there's a one-in-six chance of an imminent global nuclear war

#117

Post by trasz »

inawarminister wrote: post #116
trasz wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia is world’s last colonial empire. The two reasons to allow it to keep its colonies (ie most of the territory east of Moscow) was to keep it as a force stabilizing the region and to prevent them from being claimed by China. Now it’s no longer useful in the former role, as evidenced by conflict in Armenia, and if China pivoted to the West - given that Russia is a clear loser - it might not make sense to pursue th…

How is China pivoting to the West? Just last week we have Canadian parliament denouncing China for running extra-territorial "service stations" staffed by policemen in Ottawa. And you have OPEC+ saying "No." to Biden and the White House repeatedly.

China is quietly following the sanctions, for example - more so than several EU countries. The “police stations” are a red herring from what I can tell.

Re: Why I think there's a one-in-six chance of an imminent global nuclear war

#118

Post by paganel »

EdwardDiego wrote: post #79
paganel wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least writing down that sort of stuff (death wishes against foreign politicians) on a public forum would have been frowned upon and made part of that forum’s TOS, but, as I said, doing this to the boogie man of the day is actually seen as ok. Trump was (is, actually) also seen as a foreign-controlled boogie man, that’s why the open death threats on Twitter and the like were not reaceiving any action, including fro…

> I haven’t seen any direct threats against Biden You're not looking hard enough. Also, see the filth spewed out about any woman who is a minority Democrat congress member. > anti-Biden people had to adopt that Brandon slogan thing They chose to adopt it, your belief that they "had" to is not in alignment with the facts. Given the obvious lineage of "Let's Go Brandon", if your assertion that they chose it to avoid be…

> You're not looking hard enough.

I'm really curious, where should I have looked? I'm quite regularly checking on the reddit off-site version of what used to be /the_donald, and I have to say that never have I seen any death threats targeting Biden in there. Of course, there's anti-semitic stuff, there's racist stuff, but no death threats. To be fair though I'm not visiting 4chan/pol or 8chan/pol or whatever it's now called, but most of the people from there aren't real, anyway.

Re: Why I think there's a one-in-six chance of an imminent global nuclear war

#119

Post by rlt »

Ekaros wrote: post #89
EdwardDiego wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the billionaire conceit of buying land and (allegedly) installing bunkers in New Zealand to survive whatever they think is coming, but taken to even more deluded extremes.

The key fact is that bunker in New Zealand is likely survivable thing in long term. Not nice(having to actual work and not having modern products available), but survivable. We aren't anywhere close that with Mars. There seems to be some immense blindness just how hard and fragile living on Mars would be. For decades at the minimum but probably for centuries more likely.

> probably for centuries more likely

So… we should start trying as soon as possible.

Re: Why I think there's a one-in-six chance of an imminent global nuclear war

#120

Post by dsq »

sgt101 wrote: post #24
__turbobrew__ wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or “Russian oligarchs put plutonium in Putin’s coffee”. How long will the rich and poor of Russia put up with the cost of this war?

I think it's more likely that he retires to the country. Precedent matters if you may be on the other end of it in months/years. Also retirement to the country is not forever, which again is useful in political struggles to come.

History teaches that very rarely do dictators survive a fall. Putin is likely to face the firing squad. No successor could take the chance of leaving him alive.
Post reply on HN