United States discloses nuclear warhead numbers; restores nuclear transparency • Hacker News Board

Re: United States discloses nuclear warhead numbers; restores nuclear transparency

#361

Post by scott_w » Fri, Jul 26, 2024, 12:30 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #359

scott_w wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think Russia’s response to that would be? “Leave us your nukes or we’ll take them by force.” Talk me through the next steps.

Timing is a big deal here the day after USSR dissolved likely would have gotten them to leave. Our nukes is an arbitrary viewpoint, it’s not like the USSR limited nuke production to inside Russia. As things stabilized inside Russia it quickly became too late, but actually shelling the location of using an EOD team to ‘destroy’ the nukes puts a different spin on things.

You’re living in a fantasy world if you really think this. We’d have seen Ukraine cease to exist by 1993. If Russia wasn’t in a state to fight conventionally, they’d have nuked Ukraine.

The USA would do nothing because why would they defend an antagonistic state trying to become a nuclear power?

If you think otherwise, you really aren’t living in the same reality as the rest of us.

How do I know this would have happened? Ukraine chose to give them back. They did the same calculation but, unlike you, they understand how things really work and what would really have happened.

Re: United States discloses nuclear warhead numbers; restores nuclear transparency

#362

Post by 1992spacemovie » Sat, Jul 27, 2024, 12:47 PM UTC

Log_out_ wrote: post #286

1992spacemovie wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. And yes. Treaties for arms reduction deal with not only warheads but also delivery vehicles. Protocols include mutual inspection of disabled vehicles, etc.

Are treaties still worth something? In a world where authoritarians defect the "global community" and start wars of conquests that violate MAD , are those papers and laws still worth something?

In my eyes they are. For what it is worth, with the exception of this recent period (Ukraine), both the US and Russia for the most part made pretty good-faith efforts to comply with what their diplomats signed. I'm sure there were undeclared vehicles that were not disclosed, but I imagine those are not that plentiful, and certainly not in the quantity that would make a strategic difference (thousands sitting spare, ready to fly, all it needs is a warhead mounted an hour before launch).

I view arms control as a reduction of the number of variables in play (launch vehicles, warheads, etc). Both sides will always retain their God-given right to unleash nuclear holocaust, but both sides also reason they don't need 10,000+ warheads to do that. They can accomplish that goal with far less nukes than war planning 40 - 50 years ago called for. Partly that is due to accuracy having increased rapidly since gen 1 ICBM. There is a great book about missile guidance and accuracy, it is called "Inventing Accuracy". If you can't find a local copy or can't afford it, the Internet Archive has a PDF you can check out and read. Really insightful as to the "why" we don't require 30,000 nukes (1965) -- we only require ~5000 today and the enhanced accuracy makes them even more potent than prior bomb designs (which had a much larger yield).

Re: United States discloses nuclear warhead numbers; restores nuclear transparency

#363

Post by jjk166 » Tue, Jul 30, 2024, 3:59 PM UTC

fluoridation wrote: post #214

jjk166 wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-Based_Midcourse_Defense

The GP specifically referred to head-on interception, when the missile is coming down towards its target. This is midcourse interception, when the missile is drifting horizontally from the launch site to the target.

It's still head on interception. Indeed interception at any stage of flight is head on.