How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[SLD]

A good article on sanctions and the Russian economy.

The Sanctions on Russia Are Working

Slowly but surely, sanctions are weakening Putin.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Basically they are working, but they are slow and need a lot more time before there are further significant impacts. Putin’s workarounds aren’t that good. Unemployment is far higher than reported. Favoring domestic manufacturing isn’t working, and will result in higher prices and inferior goods. And economic decline is much greater than official statistics. A Russian tank produced and then destroyed by Ukraine technically contributes to GDP, but it’s not helpful.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Nuclear war is the ultimate crime against humanity. Due to current technology neither the US nor Russia have the time left to decide whether or not to do pre-emptive strike based on possible satelite incoming. That's even assuming (a big assumption on Biden's part) such a decision to destroy all of life (other than cockroaches and/or other bacteria) can be made in 30 seconds. In any case neither leader has the time to react at all.

That's why there is a phone and communication. Also the subs. One sub can easily make any first strike victory short lived.

There is no winning nuclear war, only enduring its consequences. So you need a madman to be able to ignore that reality in order to launch the weapons... and of course, as a pre-emptive strike, we still don't know if either military would follow those orders.

 

[Copernicus]

There is no winning nuclear war, only enduring its consequences. So you need a madman to be able to ignore that reality in order to launch the weapons... and of course, as a pre-emptive strike, we still don't know if either military would follow those orders.

The assumption being that all the failsafes in place work to prevent a rogue action by some military unit with control of a nuclear weapon somewhere. I have more confidence that things are better under control in the US than in Russia, where ever more frequent threats of a nuclear strike keep popping up in official propaganda channels. We even see some of that going on in the US, but the government is not in any way sanctioning such threats.

 

[Rhea]

That's easy, just tell Elensky to stop.

@barbos out of curiosity, why do you spell it “Elensky”? Does it have something to do with a Russian keyboard or ability to pronounce a “Z”?

 

[RVonse]

Nuclear war is the ultimate crime against humanity. Due to current technology neither the US nor Russia have the time left to decide whether or not to do pre-emptive strike based on possible satelite incoming. That's even assuming (a big assumption on Biden's part) such a decision to destroy all of life (other than cockroaches and/or other bacteria) can be made in 30 seconds. In any case neither leader has the time to react at all.

That's why there is a phone and communication. Also the subs. One sub can easily make any first strike victory short lived.

There is no winning nuclear war, only enduring its consequences. So you need a madman to be able to ignore that reality in order to launch the weapons... and of course, as a pre-emptive strike, we still don't know if either military would follow those orders.

That's what I always thought, but watch the video and learn more than most of our own leadership. A lot has changed since the Cuban Missle Crises. A telephone is mostly irrelevant because the weapons themselves have changed to the point they require an immediate response. A retaliatory attack will easily become a first strike and even assuming a sharp and quick response (sure does not sound like Biden to me). Also assuming everything electrically works right which we know from the past does not. After our first strike, Russia has no choice but to launch unstoppable hypermissles over Antartica hitting the US while our Arctic missles are stilll in the air. We are now 90 seconds before midnight yet acting like climate change is our most important issue. The biggest fear of all is simply that somebody pulls the trigger based on a false reading.

The other commonly held belief the neoliberals cling on to is that the world will somehow survive and start over again. Not likely.

 

[Jayjay]

Nuclear war is the ultimate crime against humanity. Due to current technology neither the US nor Russia have the time left to decide whether or not to do pre-emptive strike based on possible satelite incoming. That's even assuming (a big assumption on Biden's part) such a decision to destroy all of life (other than cockroaches and/or other bacteria) can be made in 30 seconds. In any case neither leader has the time to react at all.

That's why there is a phone and communication. Also the subs. One sub can easily make any first strike victory short lived.

There is no winning nuclear war, only enduring its consequences. So you need a madman to be able to ignore that reality in order to launch the weapons... and of course, as a pre-emptive strike, we still don't know if either military would follow those orders.

Putin pushes a button. Nothing happens. So he calls Shoigu to ask what the fuck is wrong. Shoigu calls his subordinates. Eventually someone will come back and say "Ivan refused to follow orders. He's now eliminated and replaced with Igor, who has IQ of 65 and will do what we say". Then Putin thanks Shoigu and pushes the button again.

I really don't see disloyalty being a problem for dictators in case of a pre-emptive strike. Unless it's among people who can actually depose of the dictator. It's only a problem for a response strike where you only have one shot.

That's not to say that I think Putin will push that button. And we'd get a warning in form of escalation using tactical nukes first.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Which is why I stated we "don't know" whether it is possible to launch a preemptive strike. Could be for Russia... could be the US. Maybe not one of them, maybe not for both. For Russia, launching nukes at the US, mostly means the rest of their (the upper Russian military brass) lives, and most other Russians, the ones that survive, are fucked!

So it has to enter the calculus for obeying those orders at the top level. I think the lower down the chain the order goes, the less likely it stops. But up high, you need some seriously brainwashed military people to think "Yeah, this is in Russia's best interests".

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Nuclear war is the ultimate crime against humanity. Due to current technology neither the US nor Russia have the time left to decide whether or not to do pre-emptive strike based on possible satelite incoming. That's even assuming (a big assumption on Biden's part) such a decision to destroy all of life (other than cockroaches and/or other bacteria) can be made in 30 seconds. In any case neither leader has the time to react at all.

That's why there is a phone and communication. Also the subs. One sub can easily make any first strike victory short lived.

There is no winning nuclear war, only enduring its consequences. So you need a madman to be able to ignore that reality in order to launch the weapons... and of course, as a pre-emptive strike, we still don't know if either military would follow those orders.

That's what I always thought, but watch the video and learn more than most of our own leadership. A lot has changed since the Cuban Missle Crises. A telephone is mostly irrelevant because the weapons themselves have changed to the point they require an immediate response. A retaliatory attack will easily become a first strike and even assuming a sharp and quick response (sure does not sound like Biden to me). Also assuming everything electrically works right which we know from the past does not. After our first strike, Russia has no choice but to launch unstoppable hypermissles over Antartica hitting the US while our Arctic missles are stilll in the air. We are now 90 seconds before midnight yet acting like climate change is our most important issue. The biggest fear of all is simply that somebody pulls the trigger based on a false reading.

The other commonly held belief the neoliberals cling on to is that the world will somehow survive and start over again. Not likely.

Mind moving this into a new "Paranoid of Nuclear Armageddon" thread and out of the Russia Invasion of Ukraine thread?

 

[bilby]

Nuclear war is the ultimate crime against humanity. Due to current technology neither the US nor Russia have the time left to decide whether or not to do pre-emptive strike based on possible satelite incoming. That's even assuming (a big assumption on Biden's part) such a decision to destroy all of life (other than cockroaches and/or other bacteria) can be made in 30 seconds. In any case neither leader has the time to react at all.

If it were still the 1980s, this would be a useful analysis.

Today, there's exact zero prospect of a US first strike against Russia. That's a result of there being a zero chance of a devastating first strike by Russia on the US. Russia has nothing like the capability that the Former USSR had to strike targets in the USA. Their missile subs are few, poorly maintained, and noisy. Their intercontinental missiles are almost certainly mostly not in working condition, and their airforce couldn't get a bomber to Berlin, much less New York, without being shot out of the sky.

The Russians couldn't destroy the USA today, and any nuclear strike on any NATO country by Russia would be suicide - their entire nation would cease to exist a few hours after such an attack.

The nuclear threat is purely Russian propaganda, intended to discourage the US and NATO from increased support of Ukraine.

That's why the only western outlets talking about it are American right-wing media. The MAGA cult is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Kremlin.

 

[RVonse]

Today, there's exact zero prospect of a US first strike against Russia. That's a result of there being a zero chance of a devastating first strike by Russia on the US. Russia has nothing like the capability that the Former USSR had to strike targets in the USA. Their missile subs are few, poorly maintained, and noisy. Their intercontinental missiles are almost certainly mostly not in working condition, and their airforce couldn't get a bomber to Berlin, much less New York, without being shot out of the sky.

The Russians couldn't destroy the USA today, and any nuclear strike on any NATO country by Russia would be suicide - their entire nation would cease to exist a few hours after such an attack.

The nuclear threat is purely Russian propaganda, intended to discourage the US and NATO from increased support of Ukraine.

That's why the only western outlets talking about it are American right-wing media. The MAGA cult is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Kremlin.

How the US's nuclear weapons compare to Russia's

Russia's nuclear missiles are newer and more devastating, but the US doesn't need to show off with flashy doomsday devices.

www.businessinsider.com

Russia's RS-24 Yars Intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), introduced in the mid 2000s, can strike anywhere in the US with what some report to be ten independently targetable nuclear warheads.

These ten warheads would reenter the earth's atmosphere at hypersonic speeds, around 5 miles a second. China has developed a similar platform, and the US simply has no way to defend against a salvo of such devastating nukes.

In comparison, the US's Minuteman III ICBM also reenters the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds, but carries just one warhead, and was introduced in the 1970s........
Lewis explained that the US really can't defend against Russia's most advanced, diabolical nuclear weapons as "the problem is just that the math never works."

A Russian nuclear ICBM would blast into orbit, turn around, break into individual reentry vehicles, and drive towards their individual targets at Mach 23. The US simply can't afford or design a system that would destroy ten nuclear warheads traveling at those mind-bending speed toward the the US.

 

[RVonse]

Mind moving this into a new "Paranoid of Nuclear Armageddon" thread and out of the Russia Invasion of Ukraine thread?

More like bringing some sense of reality back to "false narrative lapping dogs".

 

[Jayjay]

Mind moving this into a new "Paranoid of Nuclear Armageddon" thread and out of the Russia Invasion of Ukraine thread?

More like bringing some sense of reality back to "false narrative lapping dogs".

What "false narrative"?

 

[Elixir]

Mind moving this into a new "Paranoid of Nuclear Armageddon" thread and out of the Russia Invasion of Ukraine thread?

More like bringing some sense of reality back to "false narrative lapping dogs".

What "false narrative"?

That's what MAGAts call revelations that are damaging to their politics, their fake news or their conspiracy theories.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Mind moving this into a new "Paranoid of Nuclear Armageddon" thread and out of the Russia Invasion of Ukraine thread?

More like bringing some sense of reality back to "false narrative lapping dogs".

It still isn't on-topic.

 

[RVonse]

Mind moving this into a new "Paranoid of Nuclear Armageddon" thread and out of the Russia Invasion of Ukraine thread?

More like bringing some sense of reality back to "false narrative lapping dogs".

What "false narrative"?

The false narrative that "Russia is so weak and the US is so strong there is absolutely no danger of any kind of nuclear armageddon". We can horse around with Ukraine until the nukes start flying because Putin isn't going to hurt us way over here. Never mind they have had weapons that fly at mach 23 since mid 2000's.

And yes, that false narrative has everything to do with the OP.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Mind moving this into a new "Paranoid of Nuclear Armageddon" thread and out of the Russia Invasion of Ukraine thread?

More like bringing some sense of reality back to "false narrative lapping dogs".

What "false narrative"?

The false narrative that "Russia is so weak and the US is so strong there is absolutely no danger of any kind of nuclear armageddon".

So you mean your false narrative of the narrative then. Because no one is saying that. People would say that no one wins a nuclear war. There are just losers (everyone).

We can horse around with Ukraine until the nukes start flying because Putin isn't going to hurt us way over here. Never mind they have had weapons that fly at mach 23 since mid 2000's.

Ukraine asked for our help, Russia has invaded multiple countries at this point. The math is pretty simple. The US and NATO have held off on supplying Ukraine with weapons to directly attack Russia, in Russian territory. NATO IS "fighting" with both hands tied behind its back in its support of Ukraine, specifically because Russia has nukes and there is disagreement how out of his fucking mind Putin is.

Why are the conspiracy theorists siding with the oligarch/dictator of a nation with limited freedoms (political and economic)?

 

[RVonse]

Why are the conspiracy theorists siding with the oligarch/dictator of a nation with limited freedoms (political and economic)?

Because he has nuclear weapons and we want to live.

 

[Copernicus]

I don't think that it is off-topic to discuss threats of nuclear war in connection with Putin's invasion of Ukraine. Those threats are directly connected to the question of how the West should respond to the invasion of Ukraine. Should we take the threats seriously? Should we ignore them? It seems that there is some disagreement on that question. Like it or not, the possibility of how a western response might lead to nuclear disaster is unpleasant to think about, but it is topical here.

 

[bilby]

After our first strike, Russia has no choice but to launch unstoppable hypermissles over Antartica hitting the US

That's science fiction, not any kind of reality.

 

[bilby]

Never mind they have had weapons that fly at mach 23 since mid 2000's.

So what if they do?

A 1970s vintage ICBM is basically unstoppable. Nothing has changed. You can possibly stop such things with an ABM system (the US doesn't have one, and both US and Russia are limited to at most one such system by international treaty; The USSR had one protecting Moscow, but I would guess that it's not still functional).

A Patriot battery might be able to stop a handful of such weapons, but only with plenty of warning, and even then they would be easily saturated.

This talk of hypersonic weapons (Ooooh, scary!) is over-egging the propaganda pudding. Putin wants to scare the west into not opposing him, and he's using the hollow threat of nuclear war to achieve that objective. But the reality is that the Russians aren't anywhere close to being the threat that the Soviet Union was, and talking up his delivery systems just gives the impression that he's worried that he doesn't have any effective ones available.

Which he quite probably doesn't.