Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

[Kaka Tim]

I thought they'd already done that one?

Looks like they may have done it again. found more here.

 

[Weller]

Yeah, I could see, given Russian military doctrine, that tactical nukes might be seen rather less as "we're never going to use them, are we?". So perhaps they're less likely to have been stored somewhere the rain got in, or cannibalised for bits to sell - one would imagine that, whatever security Russia has that does work, it'd be guarding the nuclear weapons. But I've been surprised just how apparently hollowed-out the Russian military has actually been in this conflict, so who knows?

I guess it doesn't pay to assume that he doesn't have some working weapons, tactical or otherwise.

I know little about the nukes they have now but it is getting more worrying now every day after Putins speech which in full translated was pretty worryingly clear about what would happen and the "Russian law" about the annexed areas now

Interested to know from someone that knows about these things why they couldn't or wouldn't if there's a risk of duds and talk about Russia not using tactical nukes in case the world seeing a possible failure to detonate or whatever why couldn't or wouldnt they just launch another before we even knew surely they will have at least last few months got ready for all eventualities

Serious question as its a short distance for a battlefield type nuke , minutes surely and some top military were already before today calling for there use if Ukraine tried to take the occupied areas back

I think Im more worried now about where it all may lead rather quickly than I was in the 80s and not convinced they havent maintained stuf or even got new technology we know nothing of yet for tactical use or that they wouldn't use it in some ways Putin seems to be steering things down a path to use something

 

[existentialist]

I know little about the nukes they have now but it is getting more worrying now every day after Putins speech which in full translated was pretty worryingly clear about what would happen and the "Russian law" about the annexed areas now

Interested to know why they couldn't or wouldn't if there's a risk of duds and talk about Russia not using tactical nukes in case the world seeing a possible failure to detonate or whatever why couldn't they just launch another before we even knew surely they will have at least last few months got ready for all eventualities

Serious question as its a short distance for a battlefield type nuke , minutes surely and some top military were already before today calling for there use if Ukraine tried to take the occupied areas back

I think Im more worried now about where it all may lead rather quickly than I was in the 80s

I think you have good reason to be more worried. I can recall the existential dread of the 1980s, when we all knew this vast destructive power was dangling above our heads like a sword of Damocles. But it always felt abstract - what is scarier today is that one can see a chain of actions that could conceivably lead to a nuclear weapon being used. Even if you don't believe that this would always lead to a full-on MAD nuclear exchange, it's still a much more concrete danger than it was.

 

[Weller]

I think you have good reason to be more worried. I can recall the existential dread of the 1980s, when we all knew this vast destructive power was dangling above our heads like a sword of Damocles. But it always felt abstract - what is scarier today is that one can see a chain of actions that could conceivably lead to a nuclear weapon being used. Even if you don't believe that this would always lead to a full-on MAD nuclear exchange, it's still a much more concrete danger than it was.

Yes me too I think Im more worried now about where it all may lead rather quickly than I was in the 80s and not convinced they havent maintained stuf or even got new technology we know nothing of yet for tactical use or that they wouldn't use it in some ways

Putin seems to be steering things down a path to use something his full speech translated especially the later parts about "Western Values" and "we need to show them etc " was pretty worrying stuff

 

[Mr. Jolly]

he could escalate by taking out data communication pipes, the wests data cables, which btw he was alluding to with the nord stream shenanigans.

 

[cesare]

he could escalate by taking out data communication pipes, the wests data cables, which btw he was alluding to with the nord stream shenanigans.

Hello! Nice to see you.

 

[elbows]

Looks like they may have done it again. found more here.

The Russian explanation for this is:

Russian firefighters are tackling a blaze at the Belbek military airbase in Crimea, where officials say a plane skidded off a runway and caught fire. In August explosions rocked Russia's Saky military base in Crimea and Ukraine later said that it had hit the base with an air strike.

Mentioned at the end of Ukraine war: Russian troops forced out of eastern town Lyman

 

[Indeliblelink]

It was a Russian MIG 31 crashing [apparently]

 

[Petcha]

I wonder if the surrounded/fleeing Russian soldiers in Lyman will be shown much mercy. I kind of suspect not.

 

[frogwoman]

They need to treat them well in order to encourage more surrenders

 

[Petcha]

They need to treat them well in order to encourage more surrenders

Well they did accidentally leak a video of them 'mopping up' some injured Russian troops a couple of months ago. I suspect not much mercy is being shown on either side.

 

[LDC]

Well they did accidentally leak a video of them 'mopping up' some injured Russian troops a couple of months ago. I suspect not much mercy is being shown on either side.

Nonsense, both sides are taking loads of prisoners. Although on balance I would much rather surrender to Ukrainian soldiers than Russian tbf.

 

[Petcha]

Nonsense, both sides are taking loads of prisoners. Although on balance I would much rather surrender to Ukrainian soldiers than Russian tbf.

Well its not entirely nonsense as you can see from this Al Jareeza report. I mean it is war and you'd be naive to think war crimes aren't happening on both sides. In the clip at the end the journo does make the point that it's uniformed soldiers executing uniformed soliders here whereas the Russians were executing civilians on their retreat.

 

[LDC]

Well its not entirely nonsense as you can see from this Al Jareeza report. I mean it is war and you'd be naive to think war crimes aren't happening on both sides. In the clip at the end the journo does make the point that it's uniformed soldiers executing uniformed soliders here whereas the Russians were executing civilians on their retreat.

It was more the second bit of your post that suggested 'not much mercy' was being shown more generally. Totally think there's some incidents of all sorts of shit on all sides. But again I suspect, and the evidence would show, that it's much more by Russian troops than Ukrainian.

 

[Petcha]

It was more the second bit of your post that suggested 'not much mercy' was being shown more generally. Totally think there's some incidents of all sorts of shit on all sides. But again I suspect, and the evidence would show, that's it's much more by Russian troops than Ukrainian.

I agree 100%. Always worth remembering it can work both ways however. It's awful all round. The casual nature of the troops in that clip suggest it's not exactly the first time they've done that but the Russians have obviously been far far more criminal. Just make it end. There are no winners here.

 

[seventh bullet]

I'm worried that as more of the east is retaken that civilians will be targeted anew, accused of being collaborators, traitors, Russian lovers etc. Revenge will be on the minds of some, and without discipline, in the absence of Russian troops, an approximation of the enemy will do. It's naive to think this won't be a possibility.

 

[Bingoman]

Putin ally calls for Ukraine to be nuked after Russian retreat from key city

Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov urged the Russian president to use 'low-yield nuclear weapons' after Kremlin forces suffered a huge defeat.

metro.co.uk

 

[Pickman's model]

Nonsense, both sides are taking loads of prisoners. Although on balance I would much rather surrender to Ukrainian soldiers than Russian tbf.

Yeh they're less likely to chuck a Briton into some torture hellhole

 

[Supine]

I'm worried that as more of the east is retaken that civilians will be targeted anew, accused of being collaborators, traitors, Russian lovers etc. Revenge will be on the minds of some, and without discipline, in the absence of Russian troops, an approximation of the enemy will do. It's naive to think this won't be a possibility.

Tin foil hat. Ukraine are liberating their own country / citizens. They are not talking about invading russia.

 

[seventh bullet]

The areas that have been under separatist control for years, if they push far and deep enough could be messy.

The complex historical links with Russian-speaking populations, mixing etc which create suspicious thoughts and assumptions in the minds of some nationalists from the western parts.

Locals with scores to settle fabricating stories of neighbours being informants for Russian forces.

Paramilitaries and mercenaries without as many scruples compared to professional troops under tighter control.

The stresses and frustrations all coming out if the conditions allow it. I'm guessing this war business with death and suffering and traumatic personal loss experienced by people with subjective passions is a complicated thing, regardless of laws which may or may not be enforceable.

 

[a_chap]

They really do know how to use social media, don't they

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

I know little about the nukes they have now but it is getting more worrying now every day after Putins speech which in full translated was pretty worryingly clear about what would happen and the "Russian law" about the annexed areas now

Interested to know from someone that knows about these things why they couldn't or wouldn't if there's a risk of duds and talk about Russia not using tactical nukes in case the world seeing a possible failure to detonate or whatever why couldn't or wouldnt they just launch another before we even knew surely they will have at least last few months got ready for all eventualities

Serious question as its a short distance for a battlefield type nuke , minutes surely and some top military were already before today calling for there use if Ukraine tried to take the occupied areas back

I think Im more worried now about where it all may lead rather quickly than I was in the 80s and not convinced they havent maintained stuf or even got new technology we know nothing of yet for tactical use or that they wouldn't use it in some ways Putin seems to be steering things down a path to use something

We grew up with this fear that a nuclear bomb will wipe out all life. That is very far from true.

Tactical nukes have a relatively small blast radius and minimal radiation. If used tactically, i.e. on the battlefield, the way UA troops are not concentrated it will kill a couple of hundred of them max. But it will has escalated things so far that...

Consequences would be catastrophic for Russia if they were to use nuclear weapons of any magnitude against Ukraine

The US State Department has alluded that the response will be the sinking of the entire Black Sea Fleet and the destruction of all military bases within Russia. And it's quite clear they can do that if they wish.

Also the minimal support they get from China, India etc. will vanish straight away.

All that to kill a couple of hundred troops and destroy a handful of tanks.

Based on that, there is nothing at all to be gained by doing it and everything to lose.


A nuclear strike on a major city such as Kyiv will be met with a full nuclear response from the US/UK, it's pretty obvious that the US/UK systems work and the missiles will get to their targets, Moscow, St Petersburg etc. will be rubble within hours.

I know people think Putin is crazy, desperate etc., but he knows exactly what would happen if he does it.

US Embassy warns Americans to leave Russia | CNN Politics

The US Embassy in Moscow issued a security alert overnight that again urged US citizens to leave Russia immediately while there are still options for departing the country.

edition.cnn.com

 

[frogwoman]

I can't see the US responding with more nukes. Russia has more nukes than the US via quite some way

 

[frogwoman]

We grew up with this fear that a nuclear bomb will wipe out all life. That is very far from true.

Tactical nukes have a relatively small blast radius and minimal radiation. If used tactically, i.e. on the battlefield, the way UA troops are not concentrated it will kill a couple of hundred of them max. But it will has escalated things so far that...



The US State Department has alluded that the response will be the sinking of the entire Black Seat Fleet and the destruction of all military bases within Russia. And it's quite clear they can do that if they wish.

Also the minimal support they get from China, India etc. will vanish straight away.

All that to kill a couple of hundred troops and destroy a handful of tanks.

Based on that, there is nothing at all to be gained by doing it and everything to lose.


A nuclear strike on a major city such as Kyiv will be met with a full nuclear response from the US/UK, it's pretty obvious that the US/UK systems work and the missiles will get to their targets, Moscow, St Petersburg etc. will be rubble within hours.

I know people think Putin is crazy, desperate etc., but he knows exactly what would happen if he does it.

US Embassy warns Americans to leave Russia | CNN Politics

The US Embassy in Moscow issued a security alert overnight that again urged US citizens to leave Russia immediately while there are still options for departing the country.

edition.cnn.com

Surprised there are still any US citizens in Russia tbh (other than Edward Snowden and a few spies)

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

I can't see the US responding with more nukes. Russia has more nukes than the US via quite some way

They are not suggesting that they will in response to a tactical strike, only if Russia bombs a city.

 

[frogwoman]

They are not suggesting that they will in response to a tactical strike, only if Russia bombs a city.

I think Putin is gambling on those threats being bluffs tho

 

[Pickman's model]

They are not suggesting that they will in response to a tactical strike, only if Russia bombs a city.

We're all fucked then

 

[frogwoman]

I don’t think he will use nukes btw but not because he doesn’t want to, he can't just press the button himself, someone else has to carry out the order and his position is looking so weak that they probably won't

 

[UnderOpenSky]

I can't see the US responding with more nukes. Russia has more nukes than the US via quite some way

I'm not sure we even know that anymore.

 

[frogwoman]

A lot of people in the current regime are going to pretend they've hated Putin all along, probably a lot sooner than we think.