6 ms·

Russia is basically nazi germany with nukes. It's fucking frustrating.

by ajuc 5y ago

belter 5y ago
If I would be US President, my first measure on day 1, would be to create a Manhattan Level top secret research program of 10 to 15 years. Budget of 50 to 100 Billion, solely dedicated to neutralize Nuclear Weapons. Nothing has higher importance. "Neutrino beam could neutralise nuclear bombs": https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3734-neutrino-beam-could-neutralise-nuclear-bombs/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3734-neutrino-beam-co...
- m_ke 5y ago
  Better bet would be an international new deal program to invest in renewable energy, which could help us avoid a recession, save us from being dependent on fossil fuel states and help us deal with climate change, all in one shot.
- paulryanrogers 5y ago
  Doesn't this just add more pressure to compete since it tips the balance of MAD? EDIT: removed uncited rumor
  - belter 5y ago
    That is the argument not to do it. There are also arguments against the MAD strategy for example the assumption of a perfectly rational adversary. Not sure if can be applied here or adversaries like North Korea. See "MAD -Criticism": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction#Cri... I would argue for the top secret program.
  - LinuxBender 5y ago
    I hesitate to add an opinion on this as I know that multiple generations have been conditioned to believe in MAD. I believe MAD does apply to NATO nations and for the most part would reduce the probability that NATO countries might nuke one another. I do not however believe that Russian politicians and military recognize this concept beyond its application to NATO meaning that they would hope we believe in it. There isn't one document I can point to but rather all of their political and war history suggests they would believe a nuclear war can be won and they don't really care if half their population were wiped out. The political elites can hide in bunkers deep under ground for a very long time. They have been preparing for this since at least WWII. Add to this the evolution of smaller, faster more efficient tactical nuclear weapons and HANES EMP weapons would bolster their confidence in winning. I don't really know what winning means given they would be economically destroyed and the surviving civilian population would be starving and sick. I am just looking at this through Russian history tinted glasses.
- Proven 5y ago
- blub 5y ago
  Telling that you’d give that top priority as opposed to say quality medical care for everyone, schools, taking care of the homeless, etc.
  - ajuc 5y ago
    Let's imagine a world in which nazi Germany occupied whole Europe and there was no WW2. Holocaust was finished. Jews, Slavs, Roma people, Muslims. Every "subhuman" minority gone. 50 years of 3rd Reich. But UK got better medical care and education.
    - blub 5y ago
      I understand that you're really passionate about Nazi Germany and are probably disappointed that the only thing which is like Nazi Germany continues to be Nazi Germany even in 2022. Nevertheless. Ukraine is very special and there’s no proof whatsoever that Russia is interested in conquering or attacking any EU/NATO countries. And they’ve also shown that they probably couldn’t manage it even without NATO or the nuclear deterrent.
      - ajuc 5y ago
        > Ukraine is very special and there’s no proof whatsoever that Russia is interested in conquering or attacking any EU/NATO countries. Russia wants NATO to be back into 1997 borders. Exactly because it wants to get EE countries back into its sphere of influence. If NATO allows this to happen (and there were people arguing for it) - Russia would blackmail these countries to become Russian vassals. And if they don't want to - it would invade them. Russia already invaded Baltic states in 1991. Chechnya in 1994 and 1999. Georgia in 2008. Ukraine in 2014 and now. It's not exactly a secret. Putin and his ideologues (Dugin for example) wrote about the need to "recreate Russian empire". The only reason they don't is because USA remains active in Europe and NATO remains a credible defensive alliance. But it's not guaranteed forever. There are political forces in US and the rest of NATO that consider it too costly.
        NicoJuicy 5y ago
- russellbeattie 5y ago
  How do you know it hasn't been? I'm sure it has. So much money on defense makes it easy to fund massive projects without notice. What will be hysterical is in fifty years when it all becomes unclassified after the new weapon has to be used outing its existence and we all learn that there was a deep state after all and they hid the existence of the weapon from Trump. I'll be long dead, but I would have enjoyed it immensely. What would be even better is an announcement like, "The US has voluntarily destroyed all of its nuclear weapons and generators and welcomes the world to verify there is no longer any massively fisionable matter anywhere in the country. Also, along with this announcement we have constructed a 600 mile long accelerator which can instantly detect and detonate any such material found anywhere in the world, instantly. Everyone's nuclear weapons are now their own worst nightmare and we encourage all countries to rid themselves of such weapons as quickly as possible. Starting with you, Russia." Can you imagine?
  - belter 5y ago
    It would be a great Netflix series...but in real life I think would have to be a combination of - Neutrino accelerators. - EMP weapons. - Human Engineering. - Espionage. - Real time tracking 24/7 of the location of government officials that could give such order. - A type of SEAL Team 6 team ready to go anywhere and disable them. - Most important you need an EMP solution to disable Nuclear submarines.
    - russellbeattie 5y ago
      I was thinking about how the detection system would work. We'd send up a bunch of satellites with specific detectors on them, then we send out a burst of neutrinos which will ring all the dense fissionable material like a bell. The satellites then record the pinpoint location of where any of it is anywhere on the planet. That could be the beginning of the novel/Netflix series/pre-announcement mystery as all the scientists in the world notice something just happened, but aren't sure what for a while... I also love the idea of doing it all as a hoax. Like a bluff. We mock up fake demos and then convince the entire world we have this power to detonate any nuke anywhere as if we owned it... And say, "We really don't want to have to demonstrate it for real, but if we have to." And the world voluntarily disarms...
troon-lover 5y ago
photochemsyn 5y ago
Hyperbole and pro-war propaganda are the norm for this topic, but historical accuracy does matter. Russia is the aggressor in the Ukraine war, but if Russia was 'Nazi Germany' they'd be building forced-labor concentration camps all across Ukraine, as Nazi Germany did in Poland, prior to the murder of millions of people in those camps. Similar hyperbole is trotted out in every conflict. The Saudis are Nazis to the Yemeni people, the Israelis are Nazis to the Palestinian people, so we should have a mass boycott and divestment not just from Russia, but from Saudi Arabia and Israel as well. Of course this isn't going to happen, and thus the moral authority to condemn Russia's aggression doesn't actually exist for the United States (see Iraq as well). As far as nukes, we'd be back in the large-scale tank battles of WWII without nukes. They generally have a stabilizing influence as the architects of wars are notably reluctant to place themselves on the firing line; sending kids off to die somewhere else is not a problem for them, but facing the nuclear annihilation of their own home is another matter.
- mlyle 5y ago
  > building forced-labor concentration camps all across Ukraine, as Nazi Germany did in Poland There's reports of Russia extracting hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians to camps within Russian borders. We don't know the exact scale or nature of these camps yet. > Of course this isn't going to happen, and thus the moral authority to condemn Russia's aggression Ah, whataboutism. We're not doing shit about one terrible situation, so we shouldn't do shit about any terrible situation.
  - netsharc 5y ago
    OP's comment is weird, it's like "Only when you've passed this threshold can you be compared to Nazi Germany.". Maybe they should also have uniforms designed by Hugo Boss to qualify? This article has 3 entries from 3 teenagers, the last one is from a teenager of a Pro-Russian family who have been relocated to Russia. He's writing they've been rescued from the "tyranny": https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/apr/01/who-will-return-my-stolen-life-to-me-the-teenagers-who-fled-mariupol-ukraine https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/apr/01/w...
  - 5y ago
aivisol 5y ago
My hope is that in the light of Russian actions in Ukraine, the western world will review its attitude towards Russian/Soviet role in the context of WW2. So far the blame on starting WW2 was put almost solely on Nazi Germany, and painting Soviets almost as victims only. That is understandable, since they happened to be on the winners side, and therefore could write the history as they seem to fit for them. It is often forgotten that Soviets and Nazis agreed to divide Europe when they signed Molotov-Ribbentrop pact on August 23, 1939 [1], after which Nazis promptly invaded Poland a week later [2] and Soviets did so just weeks weeks after that. [3]. And while Germany was busy waging war on its western front [4], Soviets went on attacking Finland [5] and occupying Baltics [6]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pac... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Front_(World_War_II) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Front_(World_War_II) [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Baltic_states_(1940) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Balti...
- gruez 5y ago
  >My hope is that in the light of Russian actions in Ukraine, the western world will review its attitude towards Russian/Soviet role in the context of WW2 I don't know about you, but this gives me massive "We've always been at war with Eastasia" vibes. We really shouldn't be normalizing "reviews" of our attitude towards other countries in the context of history, based on whatever is politically expedient today.
  - eveningcoffee 5y ago
    Illusion of winning WWII or in Russia Great Patriotic War is the main influence behind these inhuman crimes. They believe that because they won Nazis, they can't be the bad guys ever and all they do is morally right.
  - dralley 5y ago

Russia is basically nazi germany with nukes. It's fucking frustrating.

by ajuc 5y ago

Russia is basically nazi germany with nukes. It's fucking frustrating.

If I would be US President, my first measure on day 1, would be to create a Manhattan Level top secret research program of 10 to 15 years. Budget of 50 to 100 Billion, solely dedicated to neutralize Nuclear Weapons. Nothing has higher importance. "Neutrino beam could neutralise nuclear bombs": https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3734-neutrino-beam-could-neutralise-nuclear-bombs/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3734-neutrino-beam-co...

m_ke 5y ago
Better bet would be an international new deal program to invest in renewable energy, which could help us avoid a recession, save us from being dependent on fossil fuel states and help us deal with climate change, all in one shot.
paulryanrogers 5y ago
Doesn't this just add more pressure to compete since it tips the balance of MAD? EDIT: removed uncited rumor
- belter 5y ago
  That is the argument not to do it. There are also arguments against the MAD strategy for example the assumption of a perfectly rational adversary. Not sure if can be applied here or adversaries like North Korea. See "MAD -Criticism": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction#Cri... I would argue for the top secret program.
- LinuxBender 5y ago
  I hesitate to add an opinion on this as I know that multiple generations have been conditioned to believe in MAD. I believe MAD does apply to NATO nations and for the most part would reduce the probability that NATO countries might nuke one another. I do not however believe that Russian politicians and military recognize this concept beyond its application to NATO meaning that they would hope we believe in it. There isn't one document I can point to but rather all of their political and war history suggests they would believe a nuclear war can be won and they don't really care if half their population were wiped out. The political elites can hide in bunkers deep under ground for a very long time. They have been preparing for this since at least WWII. Add to this the evolution of smaller, faster more efficient tactical nuclear weapons and HANES EMP weapons would bolster their confidence in winning. I don't really know what winning means given they would be economically destroyed and the surviving civilian population would be starving and sick. I am just looking at this through Russian history tinted glasses.
Proven 5y ago
blub 5y ago
Telling that you’d give that top priority as opposed to say quality medical care for everyone, schools, taking care of the homeless, etc.
- ajuc 5y ago
  Let's imagine a world in which nazi Germany occupied whole Europe and there was no WW2. Holocaust was finished. Jews, Slavs, Roma people, Muslims. Every "subhuman" minority gone. 50 years of 3rd Reich. But UK got better medical care and education.
  - blub 5y ago
    I understand that you're really passionate about Nazi Germany and are probably disappointed that the only thing which is like Nazi Germany continues to be Nazi Germany even in 2022. Nevertheless. Ukraine is very special and there’s no proof whatsoever that Russia is interested in conquering or attacking any EU/NATO countries. And they’ve also shown that they probably couldn’t manage it even without NATO or the nuclear deterrent.
    - ajuc 5y ago
      > Ukraine is very special and there’s no proof whatsoever that Russia is interested in conquering or attacking any EU/NATO countries. Russia wants NATO to be back into 1997 borders. Exactly because it wants to get EE countries back into its sphere of influence. If NATO allows this to happen (and there were people arguing for it) - Russia would blackmail these countries to become Russian vassals. And if they don't want to - it would invade them. Russia already invaded Baltic states in 1991. Chechnya in 1994 and 1999. Georgia in 2008. Ukraine in 2014 and now. It's not exactly a secret. Putin and his ideologues (Dugin for example) wrote about the need to "recreate Russian empire". The only reason they don't is because USA remains active in Europe and NATO remains a credible defensive alliance. But it's not guaranteed forever. There are political forces in US and the rest of NATO that consider it too costly.
      - NicoJuicy 5y ago
russellbeattie 5y ago
How do you know it hasn't been? I'm sure it has. So much money on defense makes it easy to fund massive projects without notice. What will be hysterical is in fifty years when it all becomes unclassified after the new weapon has to be used outing its existence and we all learn that there was a deep state after all and they hid the existence of the weapon from Trump. I'll be long dead, but I would have enjoyed it immensely. What would be even better is an announcement like, "The US has voluntarily destroyed all of its nuclear weapons and generators and welcomes the world to verify there is no longer any massively fisionable matter anywhere in the country. Also, along with this announcement we have constructed a 600 mile long accelerator which can instantly detect and detonate any such material found anywhere in the world, instantly. Everyone's nuclear weapons are now their own worst nightmare and we encourage all countries to rid themselves of such weapons as quickly as possible. Starting with you, Russia." Can you imagine?
- belter 5y ago
  It would be a great Netflix series...but in real life I think would have to be a combination of - Neutrino accelerators. - EMP weapons. - Human Engineering. - Espionage. - Real time tracking 24/7 of the location of government officials that could give such order. - A type of SEAL Team 6 team ready to go anywhere and disable them. - Most important you need an EMP solution to disable Nuclear submarines.
  - russellbeattie 5y ago
    I was thinking about how the detection system would work. We'd send up a bunch of satellites with specific detectors on them, then we send out a burst of neutrinos which will ring all the dense fissionable material like a bell. The satellites then record the pinpoint location of where any of it is anywhere on the planet. That could be the beginning of the novel/Netflix series/pre-announcement mystery as all the scientists in the world notice something just happened, but aren't sure what for a while... I also love the idea of doing it all as a hoax. Like a bluff. We mock up fake demos and then convince the entire world we have this power to detonate any nuke anywhere as if we owned it... And say, "We really don't want to have to demonstrate it for real, but if we have to." And the world voluntarily disarms...

troon-lover 5y ago

photochemsyn 5y ago

Hyperbole and pro-war propaganda are the norm for this topic, but historical accuracy does matter. Russia is the aggressor in the Ukraine war, but if Russia was 'Nazi Germany' they'd be building forced-labor concentration camps all across Ukraine, as Nazi Germany did in Poland, prior to the murder of millions of people in those camps. Similar hyperbole is trotted out in every conflict. The Saudis are Nazis to the Yemeni people, the Israelis are Nazis to the Palestinian people, so we should have a mass boycott and divestment not just from Russia, but from Saudi Arabia and Israel as well. Of course this isn't going to happen, and thus the moral authority to condemn Russia's aggression doesn't actually exist for the United States (see Iraq as well). As far as nukes, we'd be back in the large-scale tank battles of WWII without nukes. They generally have a stabilizing influence as the architects of wars are notably reluctant to place themselves on the firing line; sending kids off to die somewhere else is not a problem for them, but facing the nuclear annihilation of their own home is another matter.

mlyle 5y ago
> building forced-labor concentration camps all across Ukraine, as Nazi Germany did in Poland There's reports of Russia extracting hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians to camps within Russian borders. We don't know the exact scale or nature of these camps yet. > Of course this isn't going to happen, and thus the moral authority to condemn Russia's aggression Ah, whataboutism. We're not doing shit about one terrible situation, so we shouldn't do shit about any terrible situation.
- netsharc 5y ago
  OP's comment is weird, it's like "Only when you've passed this threshold can you be compared to Nazi Germany.". Maybe they should also have uniforms designed by Hugo Boss to qualify? This article has 3 entries from 3 teenagers, the last one is from a teenager of a Pro-Russian family who have been relocated to Russia. He's writing they've been rescued from the "tyranny": https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/apr/01/who-will-return-my-stolen-life-to-me-the-teenagers-who-fled-mariupol-ukraine https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/apr/01/w...
- 5y ago

aivisol 5y ago

My hope is that in the light of Russian actions in Ukraine, the western world will review its attitude towards Russian/Soviet role in the context of WW2. So far the blame on starting WW2 was put almost solely on Nazi Germany, and painting Soviets almost as victims only. That is understandable, since they happened to be on the winners side, and therefore could write the history as they seem to fit for them. It is often forgotten that Soviets and Nazis agreed to divide Europe when they signed Molotov-Ribbentrop pact on August 23, 1939 [1], after which Nazis promptly invaded Poland a week later [2] and Soviets did so just weeks weeks after that. [3]. And while Germany was busy waging war on its western front [4], Soviets went on attacking Finland [5] and occupying Baltics [6]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pac... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Front_(World_War_II) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Front_(World_War_II) [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Baltic_states_(1940) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Balti...

gruez 5y ago
>My hope is that in the light of Russian actions in Ukraine, the western world will review its attitude towards Russian/Soviet role in the context of WW2 I don't know about you, but this gives me massive "We've always been at war with Eastasia" vibes. We really shouldn't be normalizing "reviews" of our attitude towards other countries in the context of history, based on whatever is politically expedient today.
- eveningcoffee 5y ago
  Illusion of winning WWII or in Russia Great Patriotic War is the main influence behind these inhuman crimes. They believe that because they won Nazis, they can't be the bad guys ever and all they do is morally right.
- dralley 5y ago