11 ms·

I'm appalled after decades of massive anti nuclear war protests and shuttle diplomacy that our 'leaders' are now almost casually sliding into the abyss of nucle

I'm appalled after decades of massive anti nuclear war protests and shuttle diplomacy that our 'leaders' are now almost casually sliding into the abyss of nuclear wars

soheil 4y ago
It's also telling to read the top two tone-deaf comments here on HN talking about preparedness as if one is going on a fishing expedition instead of addressing the elephant in the room that is potential nuclear war.
- thrillgore 4y ago
  Agreed, the top comment about the bug out bag is peak HN. Have fun with that buddy. I know a post nuclear war is gonna suck and none of my skills will transfer, I'll just wait to die.
andrewstuart 4y ago
Agreed, but the era of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) deterrent principle has come to an end. Until very recently, everyone agreed that nuclear weapons could not be used because the outcome would be that everyone is destroyed. Putin has ended that era because appears unconcerned by the prospect of MAD. MAD only works if all sides agree that they do not want to be destroyed. Putin appears to not care. So, the equation has changed and we all need to rethink the new equations. It may be as simple as - "there will be a nuclear war because a madman has the keys and is willing to press the button".
- IAmGraydon 4y ago
  Please. Putin has not yet launched a nuclear attack, and I can assure you he would have already if he didn't care about MAD.
  - javajosh 4y ago
    You'll be soooo embarrassed if you're wrong!
    - IAmGraydon 4y ago
      I won't exist and you likely won't either, so what's to lose? Either way, I did not make a prediction, so I'm not sure what you're even talking about.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
- javajosh 4y ago
  They say Putin (and TFG) is a master of 10-dimensional chess but what they don't tell you is that the game always ends with everyone dead.
  - bitL 4y ago
    That sounds like it should be in Rick and Morty.
- unyttigfjelltol 4y ago
  MAD is an insane game of chicken that we always knew could be tested by madmen, zealots and gamblers. The Russian leader certainly does care about the risks. However, the nature of the game rewards him for acting that he does not, and the other players for reciprocating. Up to a point, that is. MAD is not a good or stable game.
- pmayrgundter 4y ago
  MAD applies if all sides are actually at risk of being destroyed. A close historical precedent for the current situation is the US against Japan in which the nuclear power didn't have a reason to destroy its enemy (indeed, worked to rebuild it immediately after), and the enemy couldn't retaliate on par. So there was no escalation and instead a quick capitulation. If Russia uses tactical nukes against Ukraine, it matters how it uses them. Presumably it would like to use them as the US did, so it can take Ukraine without destroying it and put a faster end to the war than otherwise possible. The US can then concede, escalate the proxy war by giving Ukraine tactical nukes, or strike Russia directly. The latter still looks mostly like MAD to me. A nuclear proxy war limited to tactical nukes is.. unfortunately all too easy to imagine, with some precedent in the Turkish/Cuban missile crisis. That could then escalate until Russia dominates with its strategic nukes, but presumably Ukraine would capitulate before that. The lesson of high cost to Russia would also be there for future reference.
  - pfisch 4y ago
    Seems more likely that every country would shut down trade with Russia, and Ukraine would keep fighting a conventional war with even better weapons than they have now.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- nyokodo 4y ago
  > Putin appears to not care. Putin wants everyone to think that, the reality is that this is almost certainly a ruse. I believe it was Nixon that wanted the Soviets to think he was mad and might press the button at the slightest provocation but it was a lie to get them to back off. There’s no evidence that Putin is suicidal. This is a nuclear steering contest which you can only win by not blinking because Putin doesn’t want Russia to be a smoldering ruin with his own bones a melted pile in the middle.
  - bitL 4y ago
    Putin also said that West only respects power and that the US only talks to Russia because Russia is the only country that can destroy it in half an hour. He might be going to demonstrate his power next so that the West "finally understands".
    - nyokodo 4y ago
      So, because we understand Russia can destroy us in half an hour we talk to them but Putin’s going to use nukes to make us finally understand Russia can destroy us in half an hour? That makes no sense.
      - bitL 4y ago
        He might be demonstrating he's willing to use them and not talking empty words.
        nyokodo 4y ago
        If he uses them then the other powers will need to severely hurt Russia directly otherwise they’d be encouraging Pakistan or India to exchange nukes, North Korea on the south or on Japan, or China on Taiwan or anyone. This would cause WWIII sooner or later so best to risk it sooner by punishing Russia to discourage the guarantee of it later. Basically, the use of nukes at all no matter what kind is a violation of MAD. If Putin wants to do that then we’d need to be back to thinking he’s suicidal, which we don’t. He wants us to give in so he can salami tactic his way into Poland, Moldova, and the Baltic states which would also lead to WWIII so we might as well keep helping the Ukrainians and steer down Putin back to the pre-2014 Russian border because if that doesn’t work then it’s WWIII anyway.
- roywiggins 4y ago
  > Putin appears to not care. Or maybe he's just better at "madman theory" than Nixon? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_theory
  - newaccount2021 4y ago
- gfodor 4y ago
  MAD hasn’t been breached until a nuclear weapon is deployed in a way that would guarantee a nuclear response under existing treaties.
- naasking 4y ago
  > Putin has ended that era because appears unconcerned by the prospect of MAD. I think you should read up on the Cuban missile crisis.
rglover 4y ago
- tptacek 4y ago
  Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - rglover 4y ago
andrewstuart 4y ago
The worst outcome is nuclear war. The second worst outcome is teaching Putin - and all other nuclear armed authoritarian governments - that all you need to do is threaten usage of nuclear weapons and you get what you demand. Within months China will demand Taiwan be handed over under threat of nuclear attack. Maybe eventually they'll demand the same of Australia - easy to do if you want the resources and know that threat of nukes gets you a country handed on a platter. What do you propose can be done to resolve this? Probably China and India are the only parties now able to influence Putin to back down.
- ta123456789 4y ago
  China and India are the only nuclear powers with a no-first-use policy.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > China and India are the only nuclear powers with a no-first-use policy Moscow also guaranteed Ukraine’s security in the Budapest memorandum. Stated policy is a poor predictor of their actions.
    - ta123456789 4y ago
      How is that relevant to the comments you are replying to? China does not need nuclear weapons to take Taiwan, and for both military and political reasons it would be incredibly stupid for them to resort to nuclear threats. And as mentioned they have a no-first-use policy.
      - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        > How is that relevant to the comments you are replying to? It gives credence to Moscow’s no-first use commitment ringing hollow.
        ta123456789 4y ago
tptacek 4y ago
The sentiment is understandable but probably has nothing to do with the story. The US routinely buys these kinds of drugs for preparedness programs, has done so long before Ukraine was an issue, and planned this specific acquisition last year, when the drug in question was approved for the purpose.
bee_rider 4y ago
Attacking a much smaller neighboring country and failing so miserably that they have to start making nuclear threats is hardly casual. That's a professional-tier fuckup. Given the apparently irrational decision making that's going on in this situation, we can only prepare in whatever ways we can.
- vkou 4y ago
  The decision-making involved was quite rational if you assume Putin was operating with incomplete information. Had the war ended in two weeks, as it looked like it was going to right at the start, he would have met his domestic goals. But then it turned out that Ukraine was more prepared than Russian intelligence thought, and Europe started flooding it with weapons. Given that Russia isn't taking the war half as seriously[1] as Ukraine is, none of what's happening is irrational or surprising. [1] By design. Putin didn't want an existential conflict that required actual sacrifice on the part of his constituents, he just wanted an easy victory to cement his popularity. He's now stuck in a situation where he has few good options.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > decision-making involved was quite rational if you assume Putin was operating with incomplete information This is stupid strategy. Military men millennia ago were beyond it. The fog of war is real. One maintains exit ramps. Fully committing at the onset of a war you unilaterally start is blunder, full stop. Part is the fundamental weakness of dictatorship, a weakness our ancestors addressed with monarchy. (Bush and Nixon could walk away from failed wars their successors wrapped up without fear for their lives. As could Roman consuls.) But a larger part is broad stupidity, concentrated at the Kremlin.
  - currenciessfe 4y ago
    He also rotted Russia from the inside, putting only incompetent but loyal acolytes everywhere. He was afraid of the Army, which is why it always treated it like shit, except for vanity projects. Which is why they have hypersonic missiles and nuclear powered torpedoes, but no socks, uniforms and guns for recruits.
CoastalCoder 4y ago
I'm guessing that in Putin's world view, what happens to the world after he dies is truly irrelevant. I.e., what he experiences is all that really matters, and he expects simple oblivion upon death. If that's his perspective, then we all might just be NPCs to him. I'm not excited about someone with little time to live, and existential dread / nihilism, having nukes. Edit: This is pure speculation on my part. I have no reliable info on Putin's worldview.
- mynameishere 4y ago
  He actually seems to be taking the traditional Russian long view. They didn't get that big through clever land deals, after all. One curiosity through this whole thing that seems to have gotten memory-holed: Boris Johnson, playing the role of Henry Kissinger, killing an early peace deal and keeping this mess going. Putin might have been looking just to keep NATO out of Ukraine. If that was the case (maybe not, see above) then this extended war might have been avoided.
  - rsuelzer 4y ago
    This was never about Ukraine, any settlement would be met by further escalation when he felt ready. Probably when the west was more fractured, insular, nationalistic and our democratic institutions more fragile.
  - bnralt 4y ago
    > Boris Johnson, playing the role of Henry Kissinger, killing an early peace deal and keeping this mess going. Putin might have been looking just to keep NATO out of Ukraine. This is odd revisionism. You can look back at articles that took place during the negotiations in late March and early April and see exactly what the Russians were saying then. The big sticking point was that Russia wanted Ukraine to agree to giving control of the Donbas and Crimea to Russia[1] before any meeting between Zelensky and Putin, while Ukraine wanted to discuss those two during a direct meeting between the two presidents. You can see the Russian foreign minister[2] as well as the head Russian negotiator[3] saying that Ukrainian proposals were unacceptable because they didn't agree to give up territory before Zelensky and Putin even met. A few days later, Putin called the peace talks a dead end because Ukrainians wouldn't cede territory and complained about crimes in occupied territories[4]. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-nazi-demand-for-ukraine-dropped-in-ceasefire-talks-2022-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-nazi-demand-for-ukrai... [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20220407172040/https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-says-ukraine-presented-unacceptable-draft-peace-deal-2022-04-07/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220407172040/https://www.reute... [3] https://web.archive.org/web/20220403075439/https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-says-peace-talks-not-ready-leaders-meeting-chief-negotiator-2022-04-03/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220403075439/https://www.reute... [4] https://web.archive.org/web/20220414093437/https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-flies-into-russian-far-east-ukraine-talks-with-belarusian-leader-2022-04-12/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220414093437/https://www.reute...
stickfigure 4y ago
Are you Russian? Because I'm pretty sure my leader isn't going to initiate nuclear war.
- H8crilA 4y ago
  Not now, but who knows in 20 or 50 years ...
tjr225 4y ago
Well thanks for being appalled. I’m sure posting about it will help.
01100011 4y ago
We failed to contain Putin in any of his previous assaults and now here we are. Our options are to continue to reward an aggressive tyrant or stand up to him. You are free to believe that Putin will become satisfied with some level of territory and influence but history provides ample evidence that Putin will not stop.

I'm appalled after decades of massive anti nuclear war protests and shuttle diplomacy that our 'leaders' are now almost casually sliding into the abyss of nuclear wars

soheil 4y ago

It's also telling to read the top two tone-deaf comments here on HN talking about preparedness as if one is going on a fishing expedition instead of addressing the elephant in the room that is potential nuclear war.

thrillgore 4y ago
Agreed, the top comment about the bug out bag is peak HN. Have fun with that buddy. I know a post nuclear war is gonna suck and none of my skills will transfer, I'll just wait to die.

andrewstuart 4y ago

Agreed, but the era of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) deterrent principle has come to an end. Until very recently, everyone agreed that nuclear weapons could not be used because the outcome would be that everyone is destroyed. Putin has ended that era because appears unconcerned by the prospect of MAD. MAD only works if all sides agree that they do not want to be destroyed. Putin appears to not care. So, the equation has changed and we all need to rethink the new equations. It may be as simple as - "there will be a nuclear war because a madman has the keys and is willing to press the button".

IAmGraydon 4y ago
Please. Putin has not yet launched a nuclear attack, and I can assure you he would have already if he didn't care about MAD.
- javajosh 4y ago
  You'll be soooo embarrassed if you're wrong!
  - IAmGraydon 4y ago
    I won't exist and you likely won't either, so what's to lose? Either way, I did not make a prediction, so I'm not sure what you're even talking about.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
javajosh 4y ago
They say Putin (and TFG) is a master of 10-dimensional chess but what they don't tell you is that the game always ends with everyone dead.
- bitL 4y ago
  That sounds like it should be in Rick and Morty.
unyttigfjelltol 4y ago
MAD is an insane game of chicken that we always knew could be tested by madmen, zealots and gamblers. The Russian leader certainly does care about the risks. However, the nature of the game rewards him for acting that he does not, and the other players for reciprocating. Up to a point, that is. MAD is not a good or stable game.
pmayrgundter 4y ago
MAD applies if all sides are actually at risk of being destroyed. A close historical precedent for the current situation is the US against Japan in which the nuclear power didn't have a reason to destroy its enemy (indeed, worked to rebuild it immediately after), and the enemy couldn't retaliate on par. So there was no escalation and instead a quick capitulation. If Russia uses tactical nukes against Ukraine, it matters how it uses them. Presumably it would like to use them as the US did, so it can take Ukraine without destroying it and put a faster end to the war than otherwise possible. The US can then concede, escalate the proxy war by giving Ukraine tactical nukes, or strike Russia directly. The latter still looks mostly like MAD to me. A nuclear proxy war limited to tactical nukes is.. unfortunately all too easy to imagine, with some precedent in the Turkish/Cuban missile crisis. That could then escalate until Russia dominates with its strategic nukes, but presumably Ukraine would capitulate before that. The lesson of high cost to Russia would also be there for future reference.
- pfisch 4y ago
  Seems more likely that every country would shut down trade with Russia, and Ukraine would keep fighting a conventional war with even better weapons than they have now.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
nyokodo 4y ago
> Putin appears to not care. Putin wants everyone to think that, the reality is that this is almost certainly a ruse. I believe it was Nixon that wanted the Soviets to think he was mad and might press the button at the slightest provocation but it was a lie to get them to back off. There’s no evidence that Putin is suicidal. This is a nuclear steering contest which you can only win by not blinking because Putin doesn’t want Russia to be a smoldering ruin with his own bones a melted pile in the middle.
- bitL 4y ago
  Putin also said that West only respects power and that the US only talks to Russia because Russia is the only country that can destroy it in half an hour. He might be going to demonstrate his power next so that the West "finally understands".
  - nyokodo 4y ago
    So, because we understand Russia can destroy us in half an hour we talk to them but Putin’s going to use nukes to make us finally understand Russia can destroy us in half an hour? That makes no sense.
    - bitL 4y ago
      He might be demonstrating he's willing to use them and not talking empty words.
      - nyokodo 4y ago
        If he uses them then the other powers will need to severely hurt Russia directly otherwise they’d be encouraging Pakistan or India to exchange nukes, North Korea on the south or on Japan, or China on Taiwan or anyone. This would cause WWIII sooner or later so best to risk it sooner by punishing Russia to discourage the guarantee of it later. Basically, the use of nukes at all no matter what kind is a violation of MAD. If Putin wants to do that then we’d need to be back to thinking he’s suicidal, which we don’t. He wants us to give in so he can salami tactic his way into Poland, Moldova, and the Baltic states which would also lead to WWIII so we might as well keep helping the Ukrainians and steer down Putin back to the pre-2014 Russian border because if that doesn’t work then it’s WWIII anyway.
roywiggins 4y ago
> Putin appears to not care. Or maybe he's just better at "madman theory" than Nixon? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_theory
- newaccount2021 4y ago
gfodor 4y ago
MAD hasn’t been breached until a nuclear weapon is deployed in a way that would guarantee a nuclear response under existing treaties.
naasking 4y ago
> Putin has ended that era because appears unconcerned by the prospect of MAD. I think you should read up on the Cuban missile crisis.

rglover 4y ago

tptacek 4y ago
Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- rglover 4y ago

andrewstuart 4y ago

The worst outcome is nuclear war. The second worst outcome is teaching Putin - and all other nuclear armed authoritarian governments - that all you need to do is threaten usage of nuclear weapons and you get what you demand. Within months China will demand Taiwan be handed over under threat of nuclear attack. Maybe eventually they'll demand the same of Australia - easy to do if you want the resources and know that threat of nukes gets you a country handed on a platter. What do you propose can be done to resolve this? Probably China and India are the only parties now able to influence Putin to back down.

ta123456789 4y ago
China and India are the only nuclear powers with a no-first-use policy.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > China and India are the only nuclear powers with a no-first-use policy Moscow also guaranteed Ukraine’s security in the Budapest memorandum. Stated policy is a poor predictor of their actions.
  - ta123456789 4y ago
    How is that relevant to the comments you are replying to? China does not need nuclear weapons to take Taiwan, and for both military and political reasons it would be incredibly stupid for them to resort to nuclear threats. And as mentioned they have a no-first-use policy.
    - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
      > How is that relevant to the comments you are replying to? It gives credence to Moscow’s no-first use commitment ringing hollow.
      - ta123456789 4y ago

tptacek 4y ago

The sentiment is understandable but probably has nothing to do with the story. The US routinely buys these kinds of drugs for preparedness programs, has done so long before Ukraine was an issue, and planned this specific acquisition last year, when the drug in question was approved for the purpose.

bee_rider 4y ago

Attacking a much smaller neighboring country and failing so miserably that they have to start making nuclear threats is hardly casual. That's a professional-tier fuckup. Given the apparently irrational decision making that's going on in this situation, we can only prepare in whatever ways we can.

vkou 4y ago
The decision-making involved was quite rational if you assume Putin was operating with incomplete information. Had the war ended in two weeks, as it looked like it was going to right at the start, he would have met his domestic goals. But then it turned out that Ukraine was more prepared than Russian intelligence thought, and Europe started flooding it with weapons. Given that Russia isn't taking the war half as seriously[1] as Ukraine is, none of what's happening is irrational or surprising. [1] By design. Putin didn't want an existential conflict that required actual sacrifice on the part of his constituents, he just wanted an easy victory to cement his popularity. He's now stuck in a situation where he has few good options.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > decision-making involved was quite rational if you assume Putin was operating with incomplete information This is stupid strategy. Military men millennia ago were beyond it. The fog of war is real. One maintains exit ramps. Fully committing at the onset of a war you unilaterally start is blunder, full stop. Part is the fundamental weakness of dictatorship, a weakness our ancestors addressed with monarchy. (Bush and Nixon could walk away from failed wars their successors wrapped up without fear for their lives. As could Roman consuls.) But a larger part is broad stupidity, concentrated at the Kremlin.
- currenciessfe 4y ago
  He also rotted Russia from the inside, putting only incompetent but loyal acolytes everywhere. He was afraid of the Army, which is why it always treated it like shit, except for vanity projects. Which is why they have hypersonic missiles and nuclear powered torpedoes, but no socks, uniforms and guns for recruits.

CoastalCoder 4y ago

I'm guessing that in Putin's world view, what happens to the world after he dies is truly irrelevant. I.e., what he experiences is all that really matters, and he expects simple oblivion upon death. If that's his perspective, then we all might just be NPCs to him. I'm not excited about someone with little time to live, and existential dread / nihilism, having nukes. Edit: This is pure speculation on my part. I have no reliable info on Putin's worldview.

mynameishere 4y ago
He actually seems to be taking the traditional Russian long view. They didn't get that big through clever land deals, after all. One curiosity through this whole thing that seems to have gotten memory-holed: Boris Johnson, playing the role of Henry Kissinger, killing an early peace deal and keeping this mess going. Putin might have been looking just to keep NATO out of Ukraine. If that was the case (maybe not, see above) then this extended war might have been avoided.
- rsuelzer 4y ago
  This was never about Ukraine, any settlement would be met by further escalation when he felt ready. Probably when the west was more fractured, insular, nationalistic and our democratic institutions more fragile.
- bnralt 4y ago
  > Boris Johnson, playing the role of Henry Kissinger, killing an early peace deal and keeping this mess going. Putin might have been looking just to keep NATO out of Ukraine. This is odd revisionism. You can look back at articles that took place during the negotiations in late March and early April and see exactly what the Russians were saying then. The big sticking point was that Russia wanted Ukraine to agree to giving control of the Donbas and Crimea to Russia[1] before any meeting between Zelensky and Putin, while Ukraine wanted to discuss those two during a direct meeting between the two presidents. You can see the Russian foreign minister[2] as well as the head Russian negotiator[3] saying that Ukrainian proposals were unacceptable because they didn't agree to give up territory before Zelensky and Putin even met. A few days later, Putin called the peace talks a dead end because Ukrainians wouldn't cede territory and complained about crimes in occupied territories[4]. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-nazi-demand-for-ukraine-dropped-in-ceasefire-talks-2022-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-nazi-demand-for-ukrai... [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20220407172040/https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-says-ukraine-presented-unacceptable-draft-peace-deal-2022-04-07/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220407172040/https://www.reute... [3] https://web.archive.org/web/20220403075439/https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-says-peace-talks-not-ready-leaders-meeting-chief-negotiator-2022-04-03/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220403075439/https://www.reute... [4] https://web.archive.org/web/20220414093437/https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-flies-into-russian-far-east-ukraine-talks-with-belarusian-leader-2022-04-12/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220414093437/https://www.reute...

stickfigure 4y ago

Are you Russian? Because I'm pretty sure my leader isn't going to initiate nuclear war.

H8crilA 4y ago
Not now, but who knows in 20 or 50 years ...

tjr225 4y ago

Well thanks for being appalled. I’m sure posting about it will help.

01100011 4y ago

We failed to contain Putin in any of his previous assaults and now here we are. Our options are to continue to reward an aggressive tyrant or stand up to him. You are free to believe that Putin will become satisfied with some level of territory and influence but history provides ample evidence that Putin will not stop.