4 ms·

Well put. Also, take the following with more than a grain of salt as I'm in no way really knowledgeable about such systems, but I would imagine both the area i

by etiam 5y ago

Well put. Also, take the following with more than a grain of salt as I'm in no way really knowledgeable about such systems, but I would imagine both the area itself and temporarily disturbing it could be valuable as cover for nuclear weapons. One valuable tool for keeping track of them involves detecting and analyzing escaped isotope traces, and that's going to be harder to pick out and make sense of against that noisy background. As I understand it, nuclear weaponry still features prominently in Russia's military doctrine and it's worth noting that not only the military but Russia's whole citizenry have been trained and prepared for nuclear fallout, to a much greater extent than most nations seem to prioritize today. In addition to artillery I imagine for instance certain kinds of anti-air systems might be attractive to put on a site like that. Any further suggestions? They could have taken weeks to bring equipment in during the "military exercise" with Lukashenko's troops, so I guess few things are truly off the table.

ClumsyPilot 5y ago
"could be valuable as cover for nuclear weapons" You can't hide a nuclear blast, we have satellites in orbit that detect the flash. Chech the vela incident - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vela_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vela_incident "Russia's whole citizenry have been trained and prepared for nuclear fallout, to a much greater extent than most nations seem to prioritize today." That's not been the case for like 40 years
- seizethegdgap 5y ago
  I believe etiam means a higher level of background radiation means it's easier to move nuclear weapons, not use them.
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    They are not detectable anyway - if you put a nuclear warhead in a truck, there is no way to detect it from a plane or a satellite, In fact you probably could put a nuclear bomb inside a lead-lined shipping container and send it from China to US, across all US railways, and back across the world on another ship, and probably no-one would ever know. Also why would Russia move nukes by land through chernobil, when they have bombers and complete control of the airspace?

by etiam 5y ago

ClumsyPilot 5y ago

"could be valuable as cover for nuclear weapons" You can't hide a nuclear blast, we have satellites in orbit that detect the flash. Chech the vela incident - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vela_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vela_incident "Russia's whole citizenry have been trained and prepared for nuclear fallout, to a much greater extent than most nations seem to prioritize today." That's not been the case for like 40 years

seizethegdgap 5y ago
I believe etiam means a higher level of background radiation means it's easier to move nuclear weapons, not use them.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  They are not detectable anyway - if you put a nuclear warhead in a truck, there is no way to detect it from a plane or a satellite, In fact you probably could put a nuclear bomb inside a lead-lined shipping container and send it from China to US, across all US railways, and back across the world on another ship, and probably no-one would ever know. Also why would Russia move nukes by land through chernobil, when they have bombers and complete control of the airspace?