5 ms·

I have been gravely concerned that Putin would order a nuclear strike in Ukraine or elsewhere. Now, I believe the chances of that happening have actually gone d

I have been gravely concerned that Putin would order a nuclear strike in Ukraine or elsewhere. Now, I believe the chances of that happening have actually gone down substantially. Why? Because Putin doesn’t want to risk ordering a nuclear strike to find out these deterrents, which haven’t been tested in decades, no longer operate (or never actually did operate). Then Russia would be completely vulnerable. Instead, I believe Putin could order nuclear testing to start again

hadlock 5y ago
I was surprised to find out just now that the last time Russia tested a nuclear weapon was, October 1990. Looks like most of their testing locations are/were located in former soviet bloc countries. Presumably that means any newer designs than what were tested in the 1980s, have never actually been tested before, and those that have, might be almost 35 years old.
- sbierwagen 5y ago
  The comprehensive test ban treaty: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Nuclear-Test-Ban_Treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Nuclear-Test-Ban... The US also hasn't tested since 1992. Given the situation with B-2 heat exchangers, F-22 spare parts and FOGBANK, I would not be interested in betting large amounts of money that American nuclear weapons are fully functional either. Interestingly enough, both the US and Russia routinely test fire ICBMs. So we know the rockets work, but not the warheads. A very awkward exchange would be if Putin goes nuts and orders a first strike, we do a "use em or lose em" ICBM launch, and all the warheads fizzle over their intended targets. What then? Awkward coughing and shuffling of feet? Roll the tanks for a full-scale war in Europe? If the nuclear umbrella truly was the only thing preventing direct Great Power conflict, then do we shrug and institute 20th century-style mass conscription and blow the dust off all the century old war stockpiles?
  - nowandlater 5y ago
    For the US, I highly recommend the Nuclear Posture Review, which is compiled by and details the current administration's policy as it relates to its nuclear stockpile and strategic purpose. The last one, 2018: https://media.defense.gov/2018/Feb/02/2001872886/-1/-1/1/2018-NUCLEAR-POSTURE-REVIEW-FINAL-REPORT.PDF https://media.defense.gov/2018/Feb/02/2001872886/-1/-1/1/201... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Posture_Review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Posture_Review
  - ouid 5y ago
    I believe that much of the work done in our nuclear laboratories is verification that the nuclear weapons work. They do not fall tremendously out of disrepair, as fissile material does not degrade much over the timescale of 20 years, and the degradation that occurs is extremely well studied. Your hopefulness is, for better or worse, extraordinarily unlikely.
    - jostmey 5y ago
      Oh, I’m sure a significant fraction of nuclear weapons would work, and the results would be horrible. It’s just that large fraction might not work. I don’t think Putin would want to reveal this because it means he lacks the capacity to fully eliminate the United States
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
nickff 5y ago
You have to ask yourself what he would achieve by using nuclear weapons, and what the costs would be. Using nuclear weapons seems unlikely to benefit the Putin regime in any way, and risks destablizing his position, both from inside and outside Russia. Putin is not crazy, he is acting rationally from his perspective (though it may be hard to understand). My suspicion is that the reports of him having cancer are correct, and the Ukraine invasion was a way to bolster and secure his position in the face of doubt caused by the cancer.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- azornathogron 5y ago
  > Putin is not crazy, [...] the Ukraine invasion was a way to bolster and secure his position in the face of doubt caused by the cancer. Although I (think I) know what you mean, the idea of starting a war, killing thousands of people, destroying cities and destroying the Russian economy all to avoid looking weak due to cancer... well, it certainty sounds pretty fucking crazy to me.
  - nickff 5y ago
    Illness and/or the prospect of death usually destabilizes dictatorships, as the regime's supporters try to secure their positions by selecting a successor who will preserve the status quo (or a favorable change). I think Putin believed that this would be a quick victory, capturing the Eastern oblasts, and either negotiating a settlement with the Ukrainians, or conquering the country and installing a puppet regime. This is what most analysts seem to have expected, and the fierce Ukrainian resistance is what's forced the West to implement strong sanctions.
    - labster 5y ago
      I agree with everything in your post but the word “forced”, which is not quite right. It’s hard to sanction a fait accompli, sure. But there was a certain eagerness in the West for at least some sanctions. A lot happened in just one week.
kurthr 5y ago
As in start Nuclear Testing in "free" Ukraine?

hadlock 5y ago

I was surprised to find out just now that the last time Russia tested a nuclear weapon was, October 1990. Looks like most of their testing locations are/were located in former soviet bloc countries. Presumably that means any newer designs than what were tested in the 1980s, have never actually been tested before, and those that have, might be almost 35 years old.

sbierwagen 5y ago
The comprehensive test ban treaty: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Nuclear-Test-Ban_Treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Nuclear-Test-Ban... The US also hasn't tested since 1992. Given the situation with B-2 heat exchangers, F-22 spare parts and FOGBANK, I would not be interested in betting large amounts of money that American nuclear weapons are fully functional either. Interestingly enough, both the US and Russia routinely test fire ICBMs. So we know the rockets work, but not the warheads. A very awkward exchange would be if Putin goes nuts and orders a first strike, we do a "use em or lose em" ICBM launch, and all the warheads fizzle over their intended targets. What then? Awkward coughing and shuffling of feet? Roll the tanks for a full-scale war in Europe? If the nuclear umbrella truly was the only thing preventing direct Great Power conflict, then do we shrug and institute 20th century-style mass conscription and blow the dust off all the century old war stockpiles?
- nowandlater 5y ago
  For the US, I highly recommend the Nuclear Posture Review, which is compiled by and details the current administration's policy as it relates to its nuclear stockpile and strategic purpose. The last one, 2018: https://media.defense.gov/2018/Feb/02/2001872886/-1/-1/1/2018-NUCLEAR-POSTURE-REVIEW-FINAL-REPORT.PDF https://media.defense.gov/2018/Feb/02/2001872886/-1/-1/1/201... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Posture_Review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Posture_Review
- ouid 5y ago
  I believe that much of the work done in our nuclear laboratories is verification that the nuclear weapons work. They do not fall tremendously out of disrepair, as fissile material does not degrade much over the timescale of 20 years, and the degradation that occurs is extremely well studied. Your hopefulness is, for better or worse, extraordinarily unlikely.
  - jostmey 5y ago
    Oh, I’m sure a significant fraction of nuclear weapons would work, and the results would be horrible. It’s just that large fraction might not work. I don’t think Putin would want to reveal this because it means he lacks the capacity to fully eliminate the United States
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

nickff 5y ago

You have to ask yourself what he would achieve by using nuclear weapons, and what the costs would be. Using nuclear weapons seems unlikely to benefit the Putin regime in any way, and risks destablizing his position, both from inside and outside Russia. Putin is not crazy, he is acting rationally from his perspective (though it may be hard to understand). My suspicion is that the reports of him having cancer are correct, and the Ukraine invasion was a way to bolster and secure his position in the face of doubt caused by the cancer.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
azornathogron 5y ago
> Putin is not crazy, [...] the Ukraine invasion was a way to bolster and secure his position in the face of doubt caused by the cancer. Although I (think I) know what you mean, the idea of starting a war, killing thousands of people, destroying cities and destroying the Russian economy all to avoid looking weak due to cancer... well, it certainty sounds pretty fucking crazy to me.
- nickff 5y ago
  Illness and/or the prospect of death usually destabilizes dictatorships, as the regime's supporters try to secure their positions by selecting a successor who will preserve the status quo (or a favorable change). I think Putin believed that this would be a quick victory, capturing the Eastern oblasts, and either negotiating a settlement with the Ukrainians, or conquering the country and installing a puppet regime. This is what most analysts seem to have expected, and the fierce Ukrainian resistance is what's forced the West to implement strong sanctions.
  - labster 5y ago
    I agree with everything in your post but the word “forced”, which is not quite right. It’s hard to sanction a fait accompli, sure. But there was a certain eagerness in the West for at least some sanctions. A lot happened in just one week.

kurthr 5y ago

As in start Nuclear Testing in "free" Ukraine?