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

Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 1001 posts

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#181

Post by nine_k »

avazhi wrote: post #125
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ukraine is not a member of NATO, so options are somewhat limited Ukraine not being in NATO means we aren’t obligated to intervene. We regularly intervene in various things without a treaty requiring it.

America will do nothing except 'strongly condemn' what's happening, just like the rest of the world. The simple fact is that there is no real upside to risking actual war with Russia - that the Russians will dominate the Ukraine while walking away with a bloody nose (in the form of minor troop losses of its own) is a foregone conclusion. Without more, that's a localised conflict that Russia rather hilariously can try…

I hope that beside strong condemnations, the US will also help with money (wars are expensive!) and stuff useful at war, from medical supplies to maybe weapons like Stingers and Javelins.

I also hope that the US will share intelligence information; US's abilities here are far greater than Ukraine's.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#182

Post by ethbr0 »

the_snooze wrote: post #136
ethbr0 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither Iraq (1991+) nor Bosnia and Herzegovina (1993+) were NATO members, and it served its purpose there. And hence declaring it before Russia invaded. Which forces Russia to choose to shoot down NATO aircraft, or operate outside those zones.

What you're describing is setting up a shooting conflict between nuclear powers. That is bad. Like really bad. It doesn't matter who shoots first because everyone dies.

That cuts both ways. NATO air assets over Western Ukraine would have forced Russia to start a shooting conflict with a nuclear alliance.

As is, they were able to move into Ukraine without nuclear risk, because the US explicitly said we wouldn't put troops there.

And let's not pretend Russia shooting down a US plane or vice versus would start a nuclear war. It happened fairly commonly during the Cold War, quietly.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#183

Post by bcrosby95 »

mvc wrote: post #162
mikeyouse wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intervening militarily invites a counter response from Russia and could lead to outright war between NATO and Russia. It's one thing to assist Kuwait, quite another to send troops to fight a nuclear-armed adversary.

So we wait until they're doing this in Poland? I think I've seen this one before. Doesn't end well for anyone involved. Better to hit an enemy when they're not expecting it.

NATO drew their line in the sand. Intervene when it's crossed. It's better to not bait and switch a nuclear power into war.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#184

Post by rmk »

trhway wrote: post #167
rmk wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine is not a member of NATO, so options are somewhat limited. Russia intends to use Chernobyl as a deterrent to NATO, according to the report (how, I do not know). It is also not straightforward to put a NATO ally right on Russia's vulnerable flank (it's endless plains and flat ground from Ukraine to Moscow, which has always been a source of strategic vulnerability for Moscow), so admitting Ukraine to NATO was ne…

>In fact, the US has had to tread very carefully simply to place missiles that are capable of carrying nuclear warheads in Poland, which is a neighbor of Ukraine. according to Putin that treading is a major motivation for his current actions.

That's correct. You don't put missiles in range of a nuclear superpower's population centers and expect them to ignore it. But I feel that the timing of this is more related to Putin's political situation at home.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#185

Post by lijogdfljk »

nickpp wrote: post #133
sAbakumoff wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Putin warned the West that he wouldn't hesitate to conduct a nuclear strike if they try to meddle.

Source? He never said that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oAOSTiumsg

How can you ask for source but then confidently claim otherwise. Ugh.

edit: https://old.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/comments/t0di4z/t... is a crappy Reddit link, but also goes on to include the nuclear mention as well.

How can you view this as anything but a nuclear warning?

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#186

Post by yaris »

mrtranscendence wrote: post #141
newaccount2021 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU is incapable and the US doesn't have near enough assets nearby in any case, Putin would likely respond with a nuke (he already basically hinted this), this is an endgame for everyone, Ukraine, Russia, Putin...there will be no de-escalation or peace process. Putin already said Ukraine "does not need to exist"...either the Ukrainians can fight him off or not. Probably not. Sanctions won't matter. Scolding Putin at t…

Putin responding with a nuke would be suicide. Maybe literal suicide. He's surely not that stupid?

Maybe he is not stupid, but there are hints that his contact with reality is becoming somewhat unstable.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#188

Post by _puk »

rmk wrote: post #112
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ukraine is not a member of NATO, so options are somewhat limited Ukraine not being in NATO means we aren’t obligated to intervene. We regularly intervene in various things without a treaty requiring it.

Absolutely. But if a NATO member is attacked, then member states are obligated to come to the member's aid. It's essentially tantamount to saying, if you are at war with a NATO member, you are at war with the whole bloc, which includes USA, UK, France (somewhat in/out member over the decades), Germany, Turkey, and so on. It's a formidable group that acts as a deterrent to any would-be aggressor. The US is not obligat…

The scary thing is if NATO decide to get involved, and it turns into war between NATO and Russia, then the security of the Baltic States plummets.

Currently, as NATO members, they are not likely to be attacked, but if NATO declares war then that deterrent is gone.

Hopefully not a likely scenario, but who knows.. There's been a lot of tension lately, especially with the likes of Belarus bussing migrants across the border into Lithuania etc, but no idea where this will end.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#189

Post by jaywalk »

shawn-butler wrote: post #140
ncallaway wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU and America have promised to help with economic sanctions on Russia and by providing military aid and lethal aid. The EU and America have explicitly not promised to help out with direct military action against Russia. The United States and Biden have said multiple times that the US will not have forces engage Russia directly in Ukraine. What specific promises are you referring to?

The US makes empty promises. Read the Budapest memorandum in which we made security guarantees so Ukraine would give up its nuclear arsenal[0]. Russian aggression would certainly be much more calculated if Ukraine still had that capability. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Securit...

> Ukraine had physical, but not operational, control.

What could they have done, throw the unarmed nukes at Russia? You also leave out the fact that Russia and the UK signed as well.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#190

Post by sonicggg »

TameAntelope wrote: post #39
hwers wrote: post #21

I can't really tell what's going on here. Is the EU and America supposed to be helping out but it's all promises without real counter attacks? Is this just the calm before the storm as russia places their troops in the right spots while everyone looks on? Anyone who's smarter than me who could enlighten me?

Ukraine isn't part of NATO, I think it's a big reason why troop deployment hasn't happened.

Not the reason though. Kosovo was not a part of NATO either. It's just that Russia is not Serbia.
Post reply on HN