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

Nordic neighbours release new advice on surviving war

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 172 posts

Re: Nordic neighbours release new advice on surviving war

#151

Post by defrost »

LargoLasskhyfv wrote: post #133
red-iron-pine wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why would Australia get hit? no where near Russia, not in NATO, no nukes, and too small of a military to mount a serious offensive for that matter they're not going to be able to supply much relief effort, either. hopefully they'll pick a side - India or China - and ride out the eventual hegemonic war between those 2.

1.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pine_Gap - ZAP! 2.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoal_Bay_Receiving_Station - Brrzzt! 3.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Defence_Satellite_C... - Sparkle!

0.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Communication_Station_Ha...

One of the places that sends the "shoot 'em up boys* signal to the stealth nuclear subs.

Re: Nordic neighbours release new advice on surviving war

#152

Post by 082349872349872 »

defrost wrote: post #151
LargoLasskhyfv wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pine_Gap - ZAP! 2.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoal_Bay_Receiving_Station - Brrzzt! 3.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Defence_Satellite_C... - Sparkle!

0.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Communication_Station_Ha... One of the places that sends the "shoot 'em up boys* signal to the stealth nuclear subs.

> "shoot 'em up boys"

I'd thought these days the signal would be "OK Boomer"?

(I'm still impressed that the РВСН has St Barbara as a patron saint. They claim that it's because they were founded on her day, 17.12.59, but I'd bet it has rather more to do with towers and lightning strikes as attributes, as well as her existing patronage over artillerymen, tunnellers, and explosives workers in general. They make severe waffle irons in Chelyabinsk: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/OUQPxihQfQDuPE-8f8X1... )

Re: Nordic neighbours release new advice on surviving war

#153

Post by 082349872349872 »

LargoLasskhyfv wrote: post #131
bilbo0s wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite what Hollywood would have you believe, there would be nations that survive a NATO/Russia war. Namely, any nation in the Southern Hemisphere not called Australia or New Zealand. Mother Nature's winds and Father Physic's half lives combine to give unaligned southern hemisphere nations the break of a lifetime. (Or of a species' lifetime I guess?) All that said, you are absolutely right about "spoils". No one is…

That's an old assumption. Modern modelling shows that the southern hemisphere gets it's share from the northern hemisphere relatively fast. Only the shortest lived isotopes won't make it down there. Then there is the dust/smoke/black carbon to consider. If there is much, that will make it down there, too. Causing weather weirdness, misharvests, and so on.

The mineshaft gap: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybSzoLCCX-Y

Re: Nordic neighbours release new advice on surviving war

#154

Post by illiac786 »

Y-bar wrote: post #25
hyggetrold wrote: post #4

In retrospect, it seems like it was a bad idea for Western countries to assume that things were going to remain peaceful after the fall of the USSR. Glad to see the threat of war being taken seriously.

Unfortunately it not "just" about war now. The changing climate has also significantly increased the risk for major disruptions on social services such as fresh water supply, electricity, sanitation, and roads/track. We now also need to add those to the list of real risks to prepare for.

I feel the worst will be migration. This is going to be pretty ugly.

Re: Nordic neighbours release new advice on surviving war

#155

Post by sgjohnson »

mdp2021 wrote: post #15
petesergeant wrote: post #9

Exceptionally well-armed NATO + JEF members, and Finland well within distance to use conventional artillery to turn St Petersburg to rubble. This is a public-awareness and support-building exercise rather than a real concern. This is like the RAF frequently issuing press-releases about intercepting Russian jets.

> conventional artillery to turn St Petersburg to rubble Well, let's really hope not. (Let us hope that nothing of worth is ever destroyed, and let us not speak about destruction of universal goods lightly.) Edit: let us be even more clear (possibly in light of the dismissing feelers who just passed by). If you are into destruction of the cultural heritage, you are the enemy. Complexities just come later.

No such thing as cultural heritage if destroying it would achieve the war goal of significantly lower the enemy's morale, irrespective of what international law says about it.

Re: Nordic neighbours release new advice on surviving war

#156

Post by vkou »

EasyMark wrote: post #125
hyggetrold wrote: post #4

In retrospect, it seems like it was a bad idea for Western countries to assume that things were going to remain peaceful after the fall of the USSR. Glad to see the threat of war being taken seriously.

I never understood why the west didn’t help more with the legitimate government forces in Russia, even if it meant more spies and what not. It was clearly crumbling and that’s when stuff like crime and corruption breed, even more so than in the old USSR, but we just sat back and patted ourselves on the back instead of seeking out allies in Russia.

The West did prop up Yeltsin and his insane economic plan, because he was a useful idiot, and then at the eleventh hour, he named Putin his successor, just before he resigned due to... Taking a bribe of a few thousand dollars. Apparently (in a society full of grifters), that was enough to burn him, not attacking parliament with artillery and tanks and killing 200 people.

The problem wasn't lack of government power, the problem was that shock therapy was a fucking awful way to handle the transition, that Yeltsin was a shitty autocrat who carried out a successful, bloody coup (Which didn't stop him from enjoying Western support - which would overlook any autocratic power grab, as long as Russia under him underwent shock therapy. Friggin' Bill Clinton campaigned for him), and that NATO turned from a purely defensive alliance to an offensive alliance and started acting unilaterally in what Russia felt was it's sphere of influence. (After a few years of good relations and bilateral collaboration.)

All that turned out to be a great way to rebuild an antagonistic relationship.

If you really want to point fingers at, though, I suppose you could blame Gorbachev for failing to keep the USSR intact and resigning, handing over power to assholes like Yeltsin. Gorbachev was a far better statesman and general human being than his successors were.

Re: Nordic neighbours release new advice on surviving war

#157

Post by ekianjo »

red-iron-pine wrote: post #84
bilbo0s wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite what Hollywood would have you believe, there would be nations that survive a NATO/Russia war. Namely, any nation in the Southern Hemisphere not called Australia or New Zealand. Mother Nature's winds and Father Physic's half lives combine to give unaligned southern hemisphere nations the break of a lifetime. (Or of a species' lifetime I guess?) All that said, you are absolutely right about "spoils". No one is…

why would Australia get hit? no where near Russia, not in NATO, no nukes, and too small of a military to mount a serious offensive for that matter they're not going to be able to supply much relief effort, either. hopefully they'll pick a side - India or China - and ride out the eventual hegemonic war between those 2.

> why would Australia get hit?

when you have 30 000 warheads you might as well sprinkle them around for all allies of NATO for good measure. When you are doing a nuclear exchange that's the strategy anyway.

Re: Nordic neighbours release new advice on surviving war

#158

Post by mewpmewp2 »

rightbyte wrote: post #106
hagbard_c wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Sweden will never surrender" part refers to the brochure warning against enemy propaganda which suggests that Swedish forces have surrendered and people should leave enemy forces unharmed. It is mentioned on page 5 of the English-language brochure: https://rib.msb.se/filer/pdf/30874.pdf

So how do you enforce an armistice when the standing order is "never to surrender"? I.e. not "enemy propaganda" but government orders. You would have units disregarding it left and right. I don't think it is a good idea to give the soldiers the impression that they will fight to the last man, since that encourages killing their officers at an earlier stage than they would otherwise. Preferably, you want to lure with…

> I don't think it is a good idea to give the soldiers the impression that they will fight to the last man, since that encourages killing their officers at an earlier stage than they would otherwise. Preferably, you want to lure with some peace agreement that is just around the corner, such that the soldiers believe that there is hope for them.

I think you are confusing Sweden with some other country.

Re: Nordic neighbours release new advice on surviving war

#159

Post by voidfunc »

bilbo0s wrote: post #51
rootusrootus wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NATO and Russia go at it and everyone is screwed, there will be no winners, nobody on the sidelines, no picking through the spoils.

Despite what Hollywood would have you believe, there would be nations that survive a NATO/Russia war. Namely, any nation in the Southern Hemisphere not called Australia or New Zealand. Mother Nature's winds and Father Physic's half lives combine to give unaligned southern hemisphere nations the break of a lifetime. (Or of a species' lifetime I guess?) All that said, you are absolutely right about "spoils". No one is…

If NATO and Russia are doing a big nuclear exchange I don't think its a wild assumption that the US and Russia also nuke China, India, and any other country that might theaten to pick apart their carcass after the bombs stop going off.

Nobody is gonna be in a situation to reassert control.

Re: Nordic neighbours release new advice on surviving war

#160

Post by mewpmewp2 »

joe_the_user wrote: post #92
sdwr wrote: post #21

That's what a functional government looks like. High-information, low-controversy, consolidating citizens around a shared truth.

A pamphlet talking about "in case of war..." seems like it is making war itself more likely. "Shared truth" seems like it's reaching also.

Why would that make war more likely?
Post reply on HN