Ukraine (Mod Note & Threadbanned Users in OP)

timmyntc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118713963#Comment_118713963

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714202#Comment_118714202

Yeah it reads as though they aren't transporting arms/vehicles/planes themselves into Ukraine, but Ukrainians are free to take them.

I thought I put a comment at the end of that post but apparently not, I meant to say that it opens the door for Ukrainians themselves to move planes into Ukraine, but NATO will not actively participate, other than making arms and planes available to them.

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714467#Comment_118714467

It is probably stated with deliberate Ambiguity - The important thing (i hope) is that the jets end up in Ukrainian hands, whether they have to fly them out of NATO Airspace themselves, or regardless of what method is used - i have been glancing at various news agencies and have seen several denials, and half retractions but none are concrete - all are ambiguous, and deliberately so as far as i am concerned. Until Sky/BBC/CNN/EU Officials, officially state that a decision NOT to 'facilitate/handover/offer' Jets, i think we can assume the UAF is going to 'be in possession' of said Jets, and said hardware will 'constitute legitimate forces of the UAF'

saabsaab

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118712800#Comment_118712800

When Russia starts to use thermobarric weapons on civillians or tactical nuclear then the outrage of the world will demand a strike against Russia. MAD won't comei n to it. I and i'm sure anyone else doesn't know the mechanics of 'MAD' I really doubt if a stealth attack on key targets would result in an immediate all out response (by either side).

VinLieger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714559#Comment_118714559

Stealth attack? In what world are you living that any Nuclear attack can be done stealthily? Also if your talking about foreign assasination via spec ops or something ridiculous then yes then there are orders already in place to immediately launch Nuclear weapons, this exists in every country. All captains of Trident are given personal orders when they set sail by the PM of the day on how to act and what to target in the case of the PM/London/UK being attacked and them being unable to reach command or someone in charge.

The only way Putin is disposed of is from within, its literally the only way thanks to how secured he is and isolated from even his most closest confidants. Notice none of the rooms hes recently been shown in have windows? Yeah hes far underground and has been since this began. Getting to him as a foreign agent would be literally impossible without major force.

ZX7R

Nato never said about sending jets.

Eu said about giving jets I thought.

saabsaab

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714592#Comment_118714592

A stealth delivered attack means that until then there is no warning or chance to respond. Putin is preparing for a nuclear exchange now..

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10563727/Putin-moves-family-members-Siberian-underground-city-designed-survive-nuclear-war.html

VinLieger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714617#Comment_118714617

There is no way to launch a Nuke and be stealthy, the second one is launched others will be sent straight back in response, then there will be a second volly from the secondary sites and a 3rd etc. This is what MAD means. Mutually Assured Destruction. And they dont have to hit the bunkers people will be in because once the nukes start flying they wont stop and it wont take all 12000 to trigger a Nuclear Winter that will decimate life on this planet. A bunker wont save you from that no matter how much supplies you have you will need to leave it eventually.

Brussels Sprout

Since this keeps coming up I think it's worth spelling it out:

1. Yes, it is horrific to watch what the Russians are doing to Ukraine. The natural reaction is to want to strike back at the Russians both to punish them and to help the Ukrainians
2. NATO cannot strike the Russians directly due to the risk of escalation, up to and including, nuclear war between NATO and Russia
3. NATO implementing a No-Fly Zone is a form of attack, since it requires both blowing Russian aircraft out of the sky and targeting Russian anti-aircraft weaponry
4. This means that the only thing that NATO can do is get weapons and equipment into Ukrainian hands so that they can then be used against the Russians by Ukrainians (or foreign volunteers serving alongside the Ukrainians).

There seems to be a perception that NATO can engage in some limited form of direct intervention while also ensuring that things do not escalate out of control. That's not how it works. If you enter the fray with a nuclear power then you don't get to control how far things escalate.

Nody

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714617#Comment_118714617

That's what subs are for; does not matter if Putin magically would manage to launch missiles to every European and American site because the nuclear subs would irradiate all of Russia in return. This is before we even go in on topics such as flight times of missiles, radar warning systems in place, back up plans (if certain sites goes down then launch counter nukes because of assumed sabotage) etc. It's great Putin's family would be in a "nuclear safe" city because they would not be able to leave it for a couple of hundred of years anyway... And that's before we discuss the quality of the source (Daily mail, seriously?).

In short; there's no way to launch nukes and not get counter nuked to glowing green status even if you would have managed to get the 30 min+ flight time, multiple detection locations and methods etc. down to zero flight time and zero detection. That's the whole point of MAD and nuclear subs etc. Does not matter what you do to our country; you'll glow green in the dark anyway.

crushproof

They've knocked out the TV tower in Kyiv, TV transmissions have been affected

https://twitter.com/AuroraIntel/status/1498683647964164099

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714559#Comment_118714559

I think any use of Nuclear weapons would potentially lead to a 'MAD' situation (mutually Assured destruction) (no pun intended at all)

I mean i dont think we are there yet. What i will say is that any use of Nuclear weapons, between Nuclear powers (of which Ukraine is no longer one) - could not remain small scale - it would lead to an all out strike (as inconceivable as that sounds) - it wouldnt be tit for tat (Russia uses one, US replies in kind etc)

The basic doctrine of Nuclear deterrence is fairly unambiguous - if either side began with 'a single nuke' it would undoubtedly play out as follows

PUTIN - Launches single device - one nuclear weapon ( in this case imagine a single tactical nuke in the Ukraine)

NATO - Must now assume willingness of PUTIN to use Nuclear weapons. Perhaps Ultimatum offered to Russia (disarm, and or remove Putin) - Assuming no response- Would therefore have no choice but to attempt to take out PUTINS Nuclear weapons - Launches FIRST STRIKE (in theory you could say retaliatory to the single strike mentioned above - in fact it would be still considered a first strike in this situation as the strikes kinda refer to an all out use of Atomic weapons) -

PUTIN - Realizing they are about to be hit launches what they have (use em or lose em) - ALTERNATIVELY - if land based Nuclear weapons would not react quickly enough, Nuclear missile submarines would respond in their place - SECOND STRIKE (retaliatory to first, also known as 'EXTREME RETRIBUTION')

Weapons pass each other in the sky - game over

TBH we are not there at all - but it is my honest opinion that if Putin did use even a low yield nuclear weapon in the Ukraine, he would have signaled the fact he is no longer a rational actor. if there were a pause, it would probably be an ultimatum from the west to disarm. and/or remove Putin - during this pause, the Russian ICBM sites would be under a microscope, and if there were any sign that Russia was about to launch, the US would launch ahead of any deadline

Like i said though, Putin will not do this. Lets be frank he doesnt have to it would be way out of proportion - it would be suicide

It wont happen

saabsaab

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714655#Comment_118714655

MAD is not a weapons system ( a la Dr Strangelove) it is a policy. A stealth nuclear attack is possible using stealth aircraft and or cruise missiles. Putin is determined to start a nuclear war if he doesn't get his way and he won't.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714617#Comment_118714617

No one survives nuclear war. You might survive the blast but you won't survive an empty resource free medicine free world for very long.

A collapse of society is also a collapse of all the things keep humans alive past our 40/50s

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714667#Comment_118714667

Yes i have found that perception too, and you are 100% correct - it cannot happen. Thats not to say that NATO cannot help with arms, munitions, and equipment et al - But it cannot directly intervene. I know the Ukrainian journalists have been asking questions, and quite frankly i cannot blame them. But pains me to say it - Boris Johnson stating that there will never be a NO FLY ZONE is 100% correct,

https://youtu.be/5iPH-br_eJQ

I feel like the nuclear option is being thrown around here a bit loosely. Just for some perspective on what we are actually talking about without being too graphic in content, here is a scenario of one nuke striking a city provided by Kurzgesagt.

VinLieger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714727#Comment_118714727

Im well aware of what MAD means.... I literally explained it in the post you replied to, also its not a policy its a military doctrine that lays out full on Nuclear war by 2 or more sides will annhilate both sides and very possibly the rest of the planet.

Cruise Missiles arent stealth, there's Satellites to track their launches and flight paths. Yes stealth aircraft exist but again you attack Moscow or somewhere with one and Russia will immediately respond with their own Nukes. Which is what MAD is about.... Mutually Assured Destruction.

Watch Wargames or play Defcon if you still cant understand how it works.

saabsaab

This lady appears to think that WW3 has already begun. She may well be right. Putin is not rational.

https://youtu.be/Hqzk1JNXKm0

Detritus70

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714727#Comment_118714727

There's no way nukes will be used

pixelburp

The thing about the nuclear option is you only need to be even fractionally wrong - through planning, timing, whatever - for it to have extinction level consequences. Glibly asserting some kind of "sneaky" attack could be got away with with the right kind of planning is nonsense. Were it even remotely possible then successive American and USSR heads of state would have been bumped off dozens of times before our era. It wasn't - because it's insane and would never work.

Putin is posturing, simple as. He has done it before and will do it again. Why? Cos the Ukraine campaign has been a disaster and he's looking like a naive idiot who didn't know what he was doing sending unprepared troops into that country. And while his citizens don't see it, he can plainly see the Ukranians are winning the PR war - there's no subtly about the Right & Wrong of this conflict.

So what does he do? Just reminds the world not to interfere, he has nukes and knows how to use them. He also knows that he if did launch, he'd be guaranteeing death to millions of his countrymen.

Varik

The USSR had a semi automated system for launching, and Russia inherited it. Putin can pre authorise a nuclear attack, if contact is lost and certain systems detect seismic or radiation then they can be launched by the onsite personnel.

During the cold war there was moves to fully automate it but people though better of a computer launching nukes by itself, say if the cold war got warm and then something unexpected happen like a nuclear power plant had an accident setting it off.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/18/soviet-officer-who-averted-cold-war-nuclear-disaster-dies-aged-77

We've had close calls in the past due to simple errors. Thankfully this wonderful human being saw sense or the world would be irradiated ashes.

Larbre34

We may well need to rely on the mutiny of Russian officers in the chain of command to save the situation at some point in the near future.

Hopefully the senior generals and oligarchs around Putin will have removed him before then, seeing the impact of the backlash against Russia for what it is.

saabsaab

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714794#Comment_118714794

Famous last words? Others said there would be no invasion.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714878#Comment_118714878

1) Putin won't invade a neighboring country

2) Putin won't destroy the entirety of human civilization, including his own country and everything he rules over because things didn't go his way or to save face

Are these equivalent, in your mind?

Nody

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714878#Comment_118714878

Well take heart in if he's wrong he'll be dead; so will most, if not all, of the human population as well. Which is why nukes, or the threat of nukes, is honestly such a non threat in the first place. If they are used, everyone dies so threatening to use nukes is like saying "I'll set this house on fire that I poured gasoline all over and tied myself to the floor with chains if you don't do what I say to kill you". Sure, you can never account for mad people doing mad stuff but as some kind of "tough man" threat its' very very hollow.

saabsaab

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714825#Comment_118714825

All quite reasonable unless you are dealing with an insane individual and I believe we are. A nuclear attack cannot be ruled out.

saabsaab

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714903#Comment_118714903

What matters is Putin's mind.

saabsaab

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714905#Comment_118714905

So do you really believe that Putin is sane?

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714878#Comment_118714878

One swallow doesn't make a summer. And you know what? If nukes are used, at least chances are good the internet won't be around for you to say "told you so", while those of us still living will be too busy dying painfully in a ditch to care either. So ... 🤷‍♂️

Look. Take some perspective and a breath. The use of nuclear weapons isn't just a Last Option, it's the Final Option and being glib about their use doesn't help the discussion stay rational. There's no tactical advantage to their use, not for Putin or anyone no matter how the man appears to be behaving. "Insanity" is reductionist and the decision to take the world with you doesn't exist outside of the movies.

Aside from anything else, reducing Putin to a madman removes the reality that he has always been this way; that is, a vicious murderer. Nothing has changed there - we just got too cosy, and too complacent taking Russian gas for granted. Places like Chechnya easy to ignore 'cos the locals were not exactly saints themselves.

As has been said, Putin has threatened this before, during the same contexts as a simple way of saying "don't even think of intervening here".

Varik

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714907#Comment_118714907

The answer to a possible nuclear attack isn't to cause a definite retaliatory one.