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

761–770 of 1001 posts

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#761

Post by afterburner »

hef19898 wrote: post #756
ed wrote: post #720

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2. Develop nuclear weapons. Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine had nuclear weapons but gave them up because Russia agreed not to invade them. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Secur...

That, along with North Korea, only shows you that it is, within the global game of influence, pretty stupid to give up a nuclear capability once you have it.

Ukraine had no choice. They were Russian nukes, and not giving them back would have probably triggered a war immediately. But with Ukraine drowning in pro-Russian influence at the time, there is no chance they would have defied Russia.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#762

Post by Johnny555 »

asdff wrote: post #667
csee wrote: post #659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then when Putin starts losing and faces a coup from disgruntled people at home? You sure that megalomaniac won't decide to go nuclear when pushed into a corner?

One would hope that if the people in the streets are protesting then higher ups in the russian state would also be unlikely to go down with Putin. Just like Hitler's most trusted generals readily surrendering to advancing allies to ensure favorable terms for their soldiers.

That's when the generals start talking about a "limited nuclear war", and talk about survivability. The leaders don't need to be convinced that there will be small numbers of casualties, just that their country can survive or even come out stronger than their adversaries

And I'm sure there are lots of simulations that show a survivable outcome, even if it turns out to not be true in reality.

Even in the USA, there's been talk of developing small tactical nuclear weapons for use in a limited nuclear war.

https://rollcall.com/2017/02/02/pentagon-panel-urges-trump-t...

But the problem, of course, is once that nuclear snowball starts rolling, it's hard to stop it, and there's no predicting how big it'll get because leaders don't always act as they do in simulations.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#763

Post by afterburner »

markdown wrote: post #718
beloch wrote: post #703

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine is not a NATO member, but Poland is. If Russia attacks a member of NATO then all members of NATO are obligated to join in defence militarily . Russia can attack non-NATO countries and intimidate NATO into doing nothing, but to attack a NATO member would automatically bring the whole alliance into the war. The whole point of alliances like NATO is to prevent countries from being picked off by a bully the way U…

You seem to have missed the point. > If Russia attacks a member of NATO then all members of NATO are obligated to join in defence militarily And? They can't actually respond militarily because MAD. NATO is useless if the enemy knows you won't initiate MAD, but they can (democracy vs dictatorship).

NATO is an agreement to initiate MAD if needed. That's the point of NATO.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#765

Post by ed_balls »

ed wrote: post #720
beloch wrote: post #703

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine is not a NATO member, but Poland is. If Russia attacks a member of NATO then all members of NATO are obligated to join in defence militarily . Russia can attack non-NATO countries and intimidate NATO into doing nothing, but to attack a NATO member would automatically bring the whole alliance into the war. The whole point of alliances like NATO is to prevent countries from being picked off by a bully the way U…

> 2. Develop nuclear weapons. Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine had nuclear weapons but gave them up because Russia agreed not to invade them. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Secur...

I hope it's abundantly clear to anyone that Putin and buddies cannot be trusted. Whenever some politician suggest any deals with them, shut him/her down.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#766

Post by Johnny555 »

kidme5 wrote: post #598
bb88 wrote: post #591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's viable for a couple of reasons unless the tech has changed significantly. One of the traditional decoys of an ICBM are basically launching a bunch of decoy mylar balloons with the warhead in one as well. The last round of interceptors couldn't figure out which of the balloons was the actual warhead. Then the government made the results secret. Worse now is the hypersonic weapons which won't have…

Actually interception happens at the boost phase (upon launch) with these systems, so decoys are not possible unless you literally launch multiple rockets.

That seems like a problem in itself, it needs to be on a hair trigger to fire soon enough to catch a weapon soon after launch. Sure would be bad to accidentally shoot down an unannounced manned rocket launch after the software thought it was a nuclear launch.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#767

Post by hutrdvnj »

markdown wrote: post #718
beloch wrote: post #703

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine is not a NATO member, but Poland is. If Russia attacks a member of NATO then all members of NATO are obligated to join in defence militarily . Russia can attack non-NATO countries and intimidate NATO into doing nothing, but to attack a NATO member would automatically bring the whole alliance into the war. The whole point of alliances like NATO is to prevent countries from being picked off by a bully the way U…

You seem to have missed the point. > If Russia attacks a member of NATO then all members of NATO are obligated to join in defence militarily And? They can't actually respond militarily because MAD. NATO is useless if the enemy knows you won't initiate MAD, but they can (democracy vs dictatorship).

> And? They can't actually respond militarily because MAD.

Of course they would respond. MAD is just a mad possibility we all have to accept. As soon as russia attacks NATO with conventional weapons it will fight back with conventional weapons. But if Putin starts nukes, well than there is obviously only one answers to it (nukes).

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#768

Post by sam0x17 »

beloch wrote: post #703
dudeinhawaii wrote: post #428

I'm genuinely curious at what point a bully threatening you with MAD can be stopped if you value the existence of your own civilization? Say Russian conquers all of Ukraine and moves troops to the Polish border and parks some tanks a bit inside. What then? Strongly worded essays? If Russia isn't raining hell on Poland, then NATO is forced to .. apply sanctions, make threats, but take no action since the escalation an…

Ukraine is not a NATO member, but Poland is. If Russia attacks a member of NATO then all members of NATO are obligated to join in defence militarily . Russia can attack non-NATO countries and intimidate NATO into doing nothing, but to attack a NATO member would automatically bring the whole alliance into the war. The whole point of alliances like NATO is to prevent countries from being picked off by a bully the way U…

> It's worth noting that Taiwan is in a similar situation with respect to China.

More than that, I think reading between the lines it's quite likely Putin and Xi Jinping have already agreed to back each other in the security council so that Russia can take Ukraine and China can take Taiwan without issue. This may have been planned for years, even, though it is right to point out that hinting at adding Ukraine to NATO without any real intentions to do so has had disastrous consequences.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#770

Post by deutschewelle »

sakopov wrote: post #739

Russia never ceases to amaze me even after spending half of my life living there. Its massive territory extends over 8 times zones stretching over 2 continents and it has historically been incapable of governing most of it. Everything outside of Moscow and Saint Petersburg (and a few other bigger cities) is often neglected and in constant state of poverty. Geopolitical stuff aside, this incessant need to have more la…

Their whole concept of centralized governance is based on snitching and secret police since the Tsar days.

The US is also a massive chunk of land with heavily armed populace, how does it deal with state wide enforcement?

They both utilize a three letter agency that stands ready to infiltrate, assassinate, demoralize, discredit and reward snitches.

It appears that violence seems to be the root of all power, and power has positive correlation with access to secrecy. The more secret and violent you are, the more you are feared. Fear of violence and the unknown amplify the need for careful self-regulating behaviors amongst the sentient group competing for scarce goods.

Post reply on HN