Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Finland & Sweden, and NATO membership.

Magnus McGinty said:
Nukes on the UK means the end of Putin and his cronies around him. They know that, presumably they don’t want it.
Click to expand...
He's got a bunker. A big palatial bunker. He's also wanted for war crimes throughout the world; no more yachts, no more hanging out with Pam Anderson. I don't think he's likely to do it now, but in a few months, or a couple of years, when things are closing in on him and even the Russians are looking to get rid of him? Why not? Look at what the Nazis did in their bunker. I'm pretty sure they would have chosen Armageddon given the option. He certainly won't be avoiding it because if the value he places on human life.
 
maomao said:
He's got a bunker. A big palatial bunker. He's also wanted for war crimes throughout the world; no more yachts, no more hanging out with Pam Anderson. I don't think he's likely to do it now, but in a few months, or a couple of years, when things are closing in on him and even the Russians are looking to get rid of him? Why not? Look at what the Nazis did in their bunker. I'm pretty sure they would have chosen Armageddon given the option. He certainly won't be avoiding it because if the value he places on human life.
Click to expand...

I get that. But he can’t launch the thing himself. It involves a team of folk willing to carry out his orders who aren’t in his cosy bunker and who will face the consequences that he won’t.
 
maomao said:
He's got a bunker. A big palatial bunker. He's also wanted for war crimes throughout the world; no more yachts, no more hanging out with Pam Anderson. I don't think he's likely to do it now, but in a few months, or a couple of years, when things are closing in on him and even the Russians are looking to get rid of him? Why not? Look at what the Nazis did in their bunker. I'm pretty sure they would have chosen Armageddon given the option. He certainly won't be avoiding it because if the value he places on human life.
Click to expand...

Putin can't just launch a nuclear attack himself, he doesn't have a big red button on his desk.
 
Even if he could get both the Defence Minister and the Chief of Staff to agree to order such an attack, he still needs generals mad enough to carry out the order, rather than put a bullet in his head.
 
cupid_stunt said:
Putin can't just launch a nuclear attack, he doesn't have a big red button on his desk.
Click to expand...
I'm aware of that (though he has taken to being pictured with a US style nuclear football). That doesn't mean he couldn't escalate things to that position by increasingly risky attacks.
 
maomao said:
But you've just said that would never happen.
Click to expand...

Errr, where? I said Putin successfully pushing the button would have consequences that the Russians may not desire.
NATO directly entering the war would be seen as aggression not defensive and probably draw in other nations in support of Putin.
 
I mean obviously we can't be certain, but I'd think it unlikely that he'd be happy to let his family die in a nuclear war. He's got two adult daughters, at least two grandchildren, and young children with Alina Kabaeva. It'd be pretty difficult to gather them all together in his bunker at short notice, and they're not going to want to sit it out in there for ages on the off-chance. It might be quite a nice bunker as bunkers go, but it's not going to come close to the kind of lifestyle the Putin family will be used to.
 
Dystopiary said:
I mean obviously we can't be certain, but I'd think it unlikely that he'd be happy to let his family die in a nuclear war. He's got two adult daughters, at least two grandchildren, and young children with Alina Kabaeva. It'd be pretty difficult to gather them all together in his bunker at short notice, and they're not going to want to sit it out in there for ages on the off-chance. It might be quite a nice bunker as bunkers go, but it's not going to come close to the kind of lifestyle the Putin family will be used to.
Click to expand...
I think they're mostly all settled abroad. So it isn't his own family who'll get the fallout (pun not really intended, just a lucky coincidence).
 
kebabking said:
As bluescreen and maomao say, having a societal wide civil defence ethos means that you tend to not just think about firey death from the sky, but you think about flooding, and wildfire, and pandemics, and how to avoid and mitigate them.

I also think that the Nordic states societal cohesion, and lower inequalility - economic, health, education etc.. is not unrelated to their 'we look after everyone, everyone looked after us' attitude to civil defence.

We have much to learn from them.
Click to expand...

Just catching up with this thread.

And yeah, I agree.

As an aside, after the floods in 2007 IIRC, round Gloucestershire way, and the subsequent cutting of mains water for those poor sods for some time, I seriously thought about buying water purification tablets and a couple of gerry cans... I mean, I haven't, cos storing the cans would be a PITA in this flat. :hmm:
 
agricola said:
TBF neither of those was a fundamental threat to their security, nor was 2014. The Soviets (and others) assassinated defectors relatively frequently all over the place, and as long as it was only defectors dying it could be tolerated (to an extent). Them nabbing pro-Russian bits of other countries also wasn't that unusual.

With this though, I think its much more about the chat on Russian TV, Parliament and other places and especially the government denials beforehand (diplomatic denials rather than those in the Press). Everyone (especially the Finns) understood that the post-WW2 Soviets wouldn't clobber you as long as you didn't do X, Y and Z, and of course that was a strong incentive not to do whatever that was. If they are going to clobber you anyway (and for no real reason) there is much less incentive not to do that.
Click to expand...

Another tactical master stroke by Putin. Complain about the Nato curious desires of your neighbours for years, despite not much moving on that front in recent times. Then do the one thing that's almost certainly going to have your neighbours rushing to sign up. This surely can't be lost on any half sane members of the regeme.
 
xenon said:
Another tactical master stroke by Putin. Complain about the Nato curious desires of your neighbours for years, despite not much moving on that front in recent times. Then do the one thing that's almost certainly going to have your neighbours rushing to sign up. This surely can't be lost on any half sane members of the regeme.
Click to expand...
It's bollocks anyway, of course. Nobody, least of all Putin, thinks NATO is going to invade Russia. This is nothing to do with security and everything to do with power.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
It's bollocks anyway, of course. Nobody, least of all Putin, thinks NATO is going to invade Russia. This is nothing to do with security and everything to do with power.
Click to expand...

Yep. Spheres of influence, Russia being a top player in global politics etc.

Obviously no one since Hitler has thought invading Russia a remotely sensible thing to do....
 
Magnus McGinty said:
I get that. But he can’t launch the thing himself. It involves a team of folk willing to carry out his orders who aren’t in his cosy bunker and who will face the consequences that he won’t.
Click to expand...
cupid_stunt said:
Putin can't just launch a nuclear attack himself, he doesn't have a big red button on his desk.
Click to expand...
Does everybody really believe this though? Like he is adhering to some Fair Play Rulebook of M.A.D. where x number of people have to agree to do it? Or like in the films, where several generals in big hats all have fancy keys in briefcases handcuffed to their wrists and they all have to turn them at the same time with grave expressions on their faces?

Fat chance, he would have bypassed all that bollocks years ago and anyone who raised objections is now counting trees in Siberia.
 
keybored said:
Does everybody really believe this though? Like he is adhering to some Fair Play Rulebook of M.A.D. where x number of people have to agree to do it? Or like in the films, where several generals in big hats all have fancy keys in briefcases handcuffed to their wrists and they all have to turn them at the same time with grave expressions on their faces?

Fat chance, he would have bypassed all that bollocks years ago and anyone who raised objections is now counting trees in Siberia.
Click to expand...

You actually think launching a nuke can be done from an Xbox controller? Or that it might need removing from storage and taken to launch facilities by other people who aren’t Putin?
 
Magnus McGinty said:
You actually think launching a nuke can be done from an Xbox controller? Or that it might need removing from storage and taken to launch facilities by other people who aren’t Putin?
Click to expand...
Well I for one have no idea just how many people are needed to launch a nuclear attack or what sort of nutters Putin might have put in those positions.

But there are a lot of points of escalation before things even get close to that being a possibility in my opinion. I mean they have not even called this a war yet.
 
Magnus McGinty said:
You actually think launching a nuke can be done from an Xbox controller? Or that it might need removing from storage and taken to launch facilities by other people who aren’t Putin?
Click to expand...
The Topols are mobile and can be launched from anywhere. The submarines are also permanently out and about with live nukes (like the UK ones). Not sure how the Russian silos work but the US ones are in a permanent state of readiness. They were designed with solid fuel tanks to minimise maintenance. Warheads need to be kept 'fresh' but it's a six year cycle and stuff should be being refreshed and replaced on a regular basis.
 
maomao said:
The Topols are mobile and can be launched from anywhere. The submarines are also permanently out and about with live nukes (like the UK ones). Not sure how the Russian silos work but the US ones are in a permanent state of readiness. They were designed with solid fuel tanks to minimise maintenance. Warheads need to be kept 'fresh' but it's a six year cycle and stuff should be being refreshed and replaced on a regular basis.
Click to expand...

This is an interesting article and especially this quote:

The US says it is monitoring the situation closely.
It has an extensive intelligence gathering machine to watch Russian nuclear activity - for instance whether tactical weapons are being moved out of storage, or if there is any change in behaviour at launch sites.
So far, they say they have not seen any significant changes.
Click to expand...

www.bbc.com

Could Russia use tactical nuclear weapons? - BBC News

Russia's nuclear weapons are 'combat ready', raising fears they could be used on the battlefield.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

AmateurAgitator
The Pro-NATO Left
Replies
17
Views
1K
belboid
belboid
shambler
  • Poll
Should the EU/NATO use direct military action to help defend Ukraine?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
167
Views
7K
Dogsauce
Dogsauce
Back
Top Bottom