3 ms·

Submarines are one of several options for this. Rockets, submarines, aircraft, or even a nuke in a container ship parked in a big harbor work.

by ceejayoz 10mo ago

tshaddox 10mo ago
Or missile systems constantly moved around on roads, railroads, or underground tunnels. And there’s also “launch on warning.”
ortusdux 10mo ago
China's recent container ship weaponization efforts are .. interesting - https://www.twz.com/sea/chinese-cargo-ship-packed-full-of-modular-missile-launchers-emerges https://www.twz.com/sea/chinese-cargo-ship-packed-full-of-mo... Reminds me of the Rapid Dragon missile system the US uses to weaponize cargo planes - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_Dragon_(missile_system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_Dragon_(missile_system)
- ceejayoz 10mo ago
  Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poseidon_(unmanned_underwater_vehicle) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poseidon_(unmanned_underwater_... I'd fully expect China and the US to be working on such things.
deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]
bob1029 10mo ago
Delivery of nuclear weapon via shipping container might seem like a deterrent but it's kind of the opposite thing. For something to be a deterrent it must have a few properties. Delivery taking a non-zero amount of time and producing a gigantic visible ordeal from outer space is a feature here. A container bomb going off somewhere in a civilian logistics chain is a surprise. Surprises cannot be deterrent by their very definition. The inability to ~instantly attribute the attack to some party would only invite additional instability.
- ceejayoz 10mo ago
  The deterrence aspect is having nukes your adversary can't be certain of getting rid of on a preemptive strike. You don't have to have them on a container ship. You need the credible threat of being able to do so.
  - bob1029 10mo ago
    Container ships tend to be fairly slow to respond and may not function as expected during a nuclear war. The only way for this to work as a retaliatory measure is to have the weapons already in place at the target locations. Now, imagine if someone were to discover the weapon and trace it back to whomever installed it. This is effectively a slow motion nuclear exchange that was initiated by the "defender".
    - ceejayoz 10mo ago
      The point of this particular sort of deterrence is to prevent a decapitation strike by an opponent who thinks they can knock them all out. "Yeah, you can drop bunker busters on the silos you know about, but six months later one of your cities evaporates." The five big nuclear powers use subs for this, but it's hardly the only option.
      - mrguyorama 10mo ago
        A key feature of those subs is that it won't be six months later. It will be an hour later because one is already stationed just outside your waters. It's also a bit more sneaky than a damn merchant vessel. You really think you're getting secrecy of a nuke existing on a merchant vessel? Why? You have given the enemy intelligence agency nothing more than an entry level homework assignment. That vessel is 99/100 getting intercepted or sunk. How many of your merchant vessels are otherwise sailing towards the country that just armegeddon'd you?
        ceejayoz 10mo ago
        > A key feature of those subs is that it won't be six months later. It certainly doesn't have to be, but that doesn't mean it can't be. > You really think you're getting secrecy of a nuke existing on a merchant vessel? Things are very routinely smuggled into countries this way today. And nukes are surprisingly hard to detect. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/detecting-nuclear-smuggling/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/detecting-nuclear... "Twice in recent years the two of us helped an ABC News team that smuggled a soda can–size cylinder of depleted uranium through radiation detectors at U.S. ports. The material did not pose a danger to anyone, but it did emit a radiation signature comparable to that of highly enriched uranium (HEU), which can be assembled into a nuclear bomb." > How many of your merchant vessels are otherwise sailing towards the country that just armegeddon'd you? Why would you put it on your own vessel?
fragmede 10mo ago
Or just a big enough nuke in the frozen northern tundra, one large enough to cause nuclear winter for the whole world.

Submarines are one of several options for this. Rockets, submarines, aircraft, or even a nuke in a container ship parked in a big harbor work.

tshaddox 10mo ago

Or missile systems constantly moved around on roads, railroads, or underground tunnels. And there’s also “launch on warning.”

ortusdux 10mo ago

China's recent container ship weaponization efforts are .. interesting - https://www.twz.com/sea/chinese-cargo-ship-packed-full-of-modular-missile-launchers-emerges https://www.twz.com/sea/chinese-cargo-ship-packed-full-of-mo... Reminds me of the Rapid Dragon missile system the US uses to weaponize cargo planes - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_Dragon_(missile_system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_Dragon_(missile_system)

ceejayoz 10mo ago
Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poseidon_(unmanned_underwater_vehicle) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poseidon_(unmanned_underwater_... I'd fully expect China and the US to be working on such things.

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]

bob1029 10mo ago

Delivery of nuclear weapon via shipping container might seem like a deterrent but it's kind of the opposite thing. For something to be a deterrent it must have a few properties. Delivery taking a non-zero amount of time and producing a gigantic visible ordeal from outer space is a feature here. A container bomb going off somewhere in a civilian logistics chain is a surprise. Surprises cannot be deterrent by their very definition. The inability to ~instantly attribute the attack to some party would only invite additional instability.

ceejayoz 10mo ago
The deterrence aspect is having nukes your adversary can't be certain of getting rid of on a preemptive strike. You don't have to have them on a container ship. You need the credible threat of being able to do so.
- bob1029 10mo ago
  Container ships tend to be fairly slow to respond and may not function as expected during a nuclear war. The only way for this to work as a retaliatory measure is to have the weapons already in place at the target locations. Now, imagine if someone were to discover the weapon and trace it back to whomever installed it. This is effectively a slow motion nuclear exchange that was initiated by the "defender".
  - ceejayoz 10mo ago
    The point of this particular sort of deterrence is to prevent a decapitation strike by an opponent who thinks they can knock them all out. "Yeah, you can drop bunker busters on the silos you know about, but six months later one of your cities evaporates." The five big nuclear powers use subs for this, but it's hardly the only option.
    - mrguyorama 10mo ago
      A key feature of those subs is that it won't be six months later. It will be an hour later because one is already stationed just outside your waters. It's also a bit more sneaky than a damn merchant vessel. You really think you're getting secrecy of a nuke existing on a merchant vessel? Why? You have given the enemy intelligence agency nothing more than an entry level homework assignment. That vessel is 99/100 getting intercepted or sunk. How many of your merchant vessels are otherwise sailing towards the country that just armegeddon'd you?
      - ceejayoz 10mo ago
        > A key feature of those subs is that it won't be six months later. It certainly doesn't have to be, but that doesn't mean it can't be. > You really think you're getting secrecy of a nuke existing on a merchant vessel? Things are very routinely smuggled into countries this way today. And nukes are surprisingly hard to detect. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/detecting-nuclear-smuggling/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/detecting-nuclear... "Twice in recent years the two of us helped an ABC News team that smuggled a soda can–size cylinder of depleted uranium through radiation detectors at U.S. ports. The material did not pose a danger to anyone, but it did emit a radiation signature comparable to that of highly enriched uranium (HEU), which can be assembled into a nuclear bomb." > How many of your merchant vessels are otherwise sailing towards the country that just armegeddon'd you? Why would you put it on your own vessel?

fragmede 10mo ago

Or just a big enough nuke in the frozen northern tundra, one large enough to cause nuclear winter for the whole world.