4 ms·

It's unlikely that they will engage nuclear weapon if the west intervene in Ukraine.

by Thaxll 5y ago

gruez 5y ago
You really want to test that out?
- drran 5y ago
  When Russians will take Ukrainian nuclear reactor, this war will be nuclear regardless of what you want.
  - krisoft 5y ago
    uhm, what do you mean by that? When we talk about the risk of a nuclear escalation we talk about the risk of this or that country launching nuclear armed missiles at an other country. How would the posession of nuclear reactors factor into that?
    - drran 5y ago
      Ukraine is the post-nuclear country. Ukraine has 4 working weapons grade nuclear stations. If Russian will capture nuclear reactor, they can convert it to nuclear landmine, because reactor uses enriched Uranium, to create equivalent of 10k Chornobyl's. Ukraine has know-how and nuclear materials (Plutonium) to create nuclear weapons at will. The only thing that stopped us is USA, Britain, France, and Germany, which used Budapest memorandum as leverage against Ukraine to prevent that.
      - deadbeeves 5y ago
        I'll be the first to admit I don't know a lot about nuclear power, but I'm pretty sure you're talking nonsense. To say that a nuclear power reactor uses weapons-grade uranium is akin to saying that a car works by lighting its gas tank on fire. For nuclear power you want a carefully controlled reaction, while for an explosion you want to release as much energy as possible as quickly as possible. Now, maybe if Russia captures a reactor they could send a scientist down to repurpose its parts to make an improvised nuke, but if that's the goal, what would be the point? It's not like Russia doesn't have nukes already. Just having plutonium and knowledge is not enough to build a nuclear weapon. No country has ever developed nukes while its main territory was being invaded. For one, even if you can build a device, you'd need to test it at least once. What would you do if you had nukes and you detected that the non-nuclear-capable country you're invading has just run a nuclear test?
        drran 5y ago
        You are talking nonsense. I will write it again just for you: Ukraine has 4 nuclear stations with 15 weapon grade nuclear reactors which are producing Plutonium and use enriched Uranium. The point is to use the nuclear reactor like a nuclear landmine, to blow up at retreat, to do maximum amount of damage. It's called «scorched earth tactics». Ukraine, as part of USSR, developed nukes decades ago. Ukraine is the fist post-nuclear country in the world.
        deadbeeves 5y ago
        Oh, so you mean "weapons-grade" in the sense that it can produce plutonium. Maybe, but so what? Also, all nuclear reactors use enriched uranium. Nuclear reactors can't produce nuclear explosions, for the reasons I said previously. Even the Chernobyl incident wasn't a nuclear explosion, it was a steam explosion. It's no more possible to turn a nuclear reactor into a nuclear bomb, than to turn a gas generator into a molotov cocktail. I don't know where you heard this absurd notion of a "nuclear landmine", but anyone who talks about exploding nuclear reactors is just spreading sensationalism. Yes, Ukraine had nuclear weapons. Had. It has since dismantled all of them and doesn't have the infrastructure to make new ones. As such, it would have to develop them again. They have to build the machines to build the weapons and then they have to test the weapons to make sure the machines are building them correctly. Then they need some delivery system, which is a problem entirely separate from merely making a device that can produce a nuclear explosion. Good luck doing all that while infrastructure is disrupted by an invasion.
ddalex 5y ago
It is very, very likely. Russian leadership see Ukraine as a Russian province, and the heart of the russian motherland, and they will treat western armies there as invaders - they are prepared to risk everything to keep that from happening.
- drran 5y ago
  It's FUD. Russians don't want to see as their families dies in flames.
  - ddalex 5y ago
    It doesn't matter what Russians think, it matters what Dughin's fanboys holed up under Altai Mountains think. Go back to 1986, and imagine what the Soviet response would be if NATO would have breached the Iron Courtain and would have fighter planes and tanks in Kiev. This is what we're dealing with here.
    - vkou 5y ago
      They probably think that being czar-for-a-week of a nuclear wasteland is something that's only attractive when literally all other options are exhausted.
- stickfigure 5y ago
  NATO doesn't need to field armies, just aircraft. The Ukranians seem to do pretty well on the ground. "A shame your tanks exploded. Perhaps their car warranty expired?" For all we know, this is already happening.
  - kergonath 5y ago
    “Which aircraft? Oh, this one? It’s not a military operation, just our pilots doing some sightseeing. Just like your lads did in Crimea in 2014, you remember?”
namlem 5y ago
You're right, it is unlikely. But it's not unlikely enough. Even a 1% chance of nuclear war is too high.
throw_m239339 5y ago
> It's unlikely that they will engage nuclear weapon if the west intervene in Ukraine. 2 weeks ago it was "unlikely" Russia launches a full scale war on Ukraine. Putin is crazy and will use nukes if he deems it necessary.
- krisoft 5y ago
  It was not unlikely two weeks ago that Russia launches a full scale war on Ukraine. I don’t know how or why this false assertion spreads the way it does.
- kuraudo 5y ago
  "Putin is crazy." 8 years of warning that he will do a thing if a red line is crossed and he does it? The jingoism permeating the west is the crazy thing. People are swallowing propaganda whole and blindly repeating talking points designed to create animus against a foreign power. No mention of the war crimes conducted by literal nazis of azov battalion in the Donbas that we begged outing to intervene over for 8 years... We have a lot to hate about putting,but it comes from his inaction to solve a genocide on his very border. Instead, he only acted when russia was threatened. Sounds logical to me.

It's unlikely that they will engage nuclear weapon if the west intervene in Ukraine.

by Thaxll 5y ago

It's unlikely that they will engage nuclear weapon if the west intervene in Ukraine.

gruez 5y ago

You really want to test that out?

drran 5y ago
When Russians will take Ukrainian nuclear reactor, this war will be nuclear regardless of what you want.
- krisoft 5y ago
  uhm, what do you mean by that? When we talk about the risk of a nuclear escalation we talk about the risk of this or that country launching nuclear armed missiles at an other country. How would the posession of nuclear reactors factor into that?
  - drran 5y ago
    Ukraine is the post-nuclear country. Ukraine has 4 working weapons grade nuclear stations. If Russian will capture nuclear reactor, they can convert it to nuclear landmine, because reactor uses enriched Uranium, to create equivalent of 10k Chornobyl's. Ukraine has know-how and nuclear materials (Plutonium) to create nuclear weapons at will. The only thing that stopped us is USA, Britain, France, and Germany, which used Budapest memorandum as leverage against Ukraine to prevent that.
    - deadbeeves 5y ago
      I'll be the first to admit I don't know a lot about nuclear power, but I'm pretty sure you're talking nonsense. To say that a nuclear power reactor uses weapons-grade uranium is akin to saying that a car works by lighting its gas tank on fire. For nuclear power you want a carefully controlled reaction, while for an explosion you want to release as much energy as possible as quickly as possible. Now, maybe if Russia captures a reactor they could send a scientist down to repurpose its parts to make an improvised nuke, but if that's the goal, what would be the point? It's not like Russia doesn't have nukes already. Just having plutonium and knowledge is not enough to build a nuclear weapon. No country has ever developed nukes while its main territory was being invaded. For one, even if you can build a device, you'd need to test it at least once. What would you do if you had nukes and you detected that the non-nuclear-capable country you're invading has just run a nuclear test?
      - drran 5y ago
        You are talking nonsense. I will write it again just for you: Ukraine has 4 nuclear stations with 15 weapon grade nuclear reactors which are producing Plutonium and use enriched Uranium. The point is to use the nuclear reactor like a nuclear landmine, to blow up at retreat, to do maximum amount of damage. It's called «scorched earth tactics». Ukraine, as part of USSR, developed nukes decades ago. Ukraine is the fist post-nuclear country in the world.
        deadbeeves 5y ago
        Oh, so you mean "weapons-grade" in the sense that it can produce plutonium. Maybe, but so what? Also, all nuclear reactors use enriched uranium. Nuclear reactors can't produce nuclear explosions, for the reasons I said previously. Even the Chernobyl incident wasn't a nuclear explosion, it was a steam explosion. It's no more possible to turn a nuclear reactor into a nuclear bomb, than to turn a gas generator into a molotov cocktail. I don't know where you heard this absurd notion of a "nuclear landmine", but anyone who talks about exploding nuclear reactors is just spreading sensationalism. Yes, Ukraine had nuclear weapons. Had. It has since dismantled all of them and doesn't have the infrastructure to make new ones. As such, it would have to develop them again. They have to build the machines to build the weapons and then they have to test the weapons to make sure the machines are building them correctly. Then they need some delivery system, which is a problem entirely separate from merely making a device that can produce a nuclear explosion. Good luck doing all that while infrastructure is disrupted by an invasion.

ddalex 5y ago

It is very, very likely. Russian leadership see Ukraine as a Russian province, and the heart of the russian motherland, and they will treat western armies there as invaders - they are prepared to risk everything to keep that from happening.

drran 5y ago
It's FUD. Russians don't want to see as their families dies in flames.
- ddalex 5y ago
  It doesn't matter what Russians think, it matters what Dughin's fanboys holed up under Altai Mountains think. Go back to 1986, and imagine what the Soviet response would be if NATO would have breached the Iron Courtain and would have fighter planes and tanks in Kiev. This is what we're dealing with here.
  - vkou 5y ago
    They probably think that being czar-for-a-week of a nuclear wasteland is something that's only attractive when literally all other options are exhausted.
stickfigure 5y ago
NATO doesn't need to field armies, just aircraft. The Ukranians seem to do pretty well on the ground. "A shame your tanks exploded. Perhaps their car warranty expired?" For all we know, this is already happening.
- kergonath 5y ago
  “Which aircraft? Oh, this one? It’s not a military operation, just our pilots doing some sightseeing. Just like your lads did in Crimea in 2014, you remember?”

namlem 5y ago

You're right, it is unlikely. But it's not unlikely enough. Even a 1% chance of nuclear war is too high.

throw_m239339 5y ago

> It's unlikely that they will engage nuclear weapon if the west intervene in Ukraine. 2 weeks ago it was "unlikely" Russia launches a full scale war on Ukraine. Putin is crazy and will use nukes if he deems it necessary.

krisoft 5y ago
It was not unlikely two weeks ago that Russia launches a full scale war on Ukraine. I don’t know how or why this false assertion spreads the way it does.
kuraudo 5y ago
"Putin is crazy." 8 years of warning that he will do a thing if a red line is crossed and he does it? The jingoism permeating the west is the crazy thing. People are swallowing propaganda whole and blindly repeating talking points designed to create animus against a foreign power. No mention of the war crimes conducted by literal nazis of azov battalion in the Donbas that we begged outing to intervene over for 8 years... We have a lot to hate about putting,but it comes from his inaction to solve a genocide on his very border. Instead, he only acted when russia was threatened. Sounds logical to me.