Russian Plans, Possibly for War With Nato, in the Years Ahead

[Peartree]

Speculation on Macron's intentions that I heard yesterday was that France may send Mirage fighters with ground support and pilots and provide them all with dual citizenship and Ukrainian passports for plausible deniability much like the soviets flew combat missions for the Vietnamese.

 

[Antares JS]

Speculation on Macron's intentions that I heard yesterday was that France may send Mirage fighters with ground support and pilots and provide them all with dual citizenship and Ukrainian passports for plausible deniability much like the soviets flew combat missions for the Vietnamese.

That would be interesting if it happens.

Let me just mention too, France's post-WW2 reputation for being wimpy and quick to surrender is completely unfair. (maybe I can revive the history thread with a discussion of that...)

 

[drewnickel]

That would be interesting if it happens.

Let me just mention too, France's post-WW2 reputation for being wimpy and quick to surrender is completely unfair. (maybe I can revive the history thread with a discussion of that...)

I mean, France has one of the most powerful militaries in the world and something like the third or fourth largest nuclear arsenal (depending on whether you count total warheads or deployed warheads). Only reason they fell so quickly in WWII was the overwhelming success of German Blitzkrieg tactics. They punched through the front line and surrounded the capital, forcing an immediate surrender.

 

[NTP2]

(maybe I can revive the history thread with a discussion of that...)

Please do I’d love to debate this!!

 

[NTP2]

Yep, tritium for H-bombs is expensive and has a half-life of only 12 years, so it needs to be refreshed every so often. It wouldn't surprise me if most of Russia's bombs were nonfunctional. Still, it also wouldn't surprise me if at least a few dozen to a few hundred of their bombs have actually been properly maintained.

I didn’t know that they needed a refill, why do they need tritium?

 

[Antares JS]

I didn’t know that they needed a refill, why do they need tritium?

Tritium is Hydrogen-3, which is used for the fusion reaction. It undergoes fusion more easily (presumably meaning at a lower temperature) than common Hydrogen-1 does.

 

[NTP2]

Tritium is Hydrogen-3, which is used for the fusion reaction. It undergoes fusion more easily (presumably meaning at a lower temperature) than common Hydrogen-1 does.

Ok I see, I should have known that, I mean if you had said H-3 instead of the proper name I would have gotten it.

 

[Antares JS]

Ok I see, I should have known that, I mean if you had said H-3 instead of the proper name I would have gotten it.

For future reference, Hydrogen-2 is also called deuterium.

 

[NTP2]

For future reference, Hydrogen-2 is also called deuterium.

On that note does every isotope have a name too, or just hydrogen? Because I’ve only ever heard them used in reference to hydrogen.

 

[Antares JS]

On that note does every isotope have a name too, or just hydrogen? Because I’ve only ever heard them used in reference to hydrogen.

Deuterium and tritium are the only special names I know of. All the other ones are just called [element name]-[atomic mass number].

 

[cls]

He2 is sometimes called diproton. decays very quickly, probably in to deuterium. Was probably detected by experiments in recent years. (I think.)

 

[techrat]

whether it might be more moral to send in troops with strict orders to stay within the territory of Ukraine to wipe out the Russian army

I realize I'm coming into this late, but just want to point out that what counts as "Territory of Ukraine" is up for debate depending upon who you're talking to. For example..., is Crimea now Russian or Ukrainian? Borders seem to change with every military action. No matter what, this will not end well for Ukraine or for Russia. And if NATO does get involved, well, then it's WWIII whether we like it or not.

 

[Antares JS]

I realize I'm coming into this late, but just want to point out that what counts as "Territory of Ukraine" is up for debate depending upon who you're talking to.

Obviously, the internationally recognized borders.

The only one I recognize as remotely possibly being up for debate is Crimea, due to the circumstances under which it was transferred to the Ukrainian SSR, though I would favor Russia being forced to give it up as a penalty for their deeds.

 

[NTP2]

though I would favor Russia being forced to give it up as a penalty for their deeds.

By that point they would have lost an insane amount of people and money, I think that would just make them angrier. But that’s a problem that Ukraine would love to have.

 

[cls]

Obviously, the internationally recognized borders.

Since when? 2014? 1993? 1919? 18th century, Tzar Peter?

Same problem with "Poland", the border moves a lot. People that live there don't know for sure, either.

 

[Antares JS]

Since when? 2014? 1993? 1919? 18th century, Tzar Peter?

Same problem with "Poland", the border moves a lot. People that live there don't know for sure, either.

That is a nonsensical point. Obviously I mean the borders that were recognized when Ukraine became independent after the breakup of the Soviet Union, and everyone was generally happy with until Russia decided to throw a hissy fit over their feeling entitled to having Ukraine in their sphere.

 

[drewnickel]

Yep, tritium for H-bombs is expensive and has a half-life of only 12 years, so it needs to be refreshed every so often. It wouldn't surprise me if most of Russia's bombs were nonfunctional. Still, it also wouldn't surprise me if at least a few dozen to a few hundred of their bombs have actually been properly maintained.

I was under the impression tritium wasn't directly used in most modern weapons, but instead lithium deuteride that broke into deuterium helium and tritium when exposed to neutrons from the primary.

 

[NTP2]

I was under the impression tritium wasn't directly used in most modern weapons, but instead lithium deuteride that broke into deuterium helium and tritium when exposed to neutrons from the primary

What are the chances that they have modern weapons, they seem to me like people who do stuff quick and dirty.

 

[Antares JS]

What are the chances that they have modern weapons, they seem to me like people who do stuff quick and dirty.

Your impression of Russian tech is correct.

Book recommendation: MiG Pilot by John Barron.

It's about Viktor Belenko's defection to the United States. There's some talk in the book about what they learned about his plane, a MiG-25. The thing was the epitome of quick and dirty.

 

[drewnickel]

What are the chances that they have modern weapons, they seem to me like people who do stuff quick and dirty.

Very high. Lithium deuteride has been in use since the Castle Bravo test, and almost certainly was adopted by the Soviets. Them doing things the "quick and dirty" way means safety oversights (Chernobyl, etc) and espionage (the Rosenbergs for example), it by no means implies they didn't do everything in their power to duplicate or exceed the US's capability (Tsar Bomba for example) or that those abilities disappeared after the wall fell. Granted they still use liquid propellant ICBMs (RS28) that pose storage issues vs the solid propellant ICBMs the US has (Minuteman/Trident).

 

[cls]

That is a nonsensical point. Obviously I mean the borders that were recognized when Ukraine became independent after the breakup of the Soviet Union, and everyone was generally happy with until Russia decided to throw a hissy fit over their feeling entitled to having Ukraine in their sphere.

No, that is not obvious, at all.

If it were obvious, there would be no war about it, or any action in 2014.

It's not at all obvious to me that the post SSR lives were "right" and "fair" either historically or to the people that lived there then.

 

[Dotini]

For enthusiastic researchers of what a retired general Bakshi from India thinks about all this, see his 36 minute video on YouTube. He thinks the US will dump Ukraine to focus on China, leaving European allies to fight a tactical nuclear war with Russia.

Will the war in Ukraine spiral into WW3?​

 

[NTP2]

Very high. Lithium deuteride has been in use since the Castle Bravo test, and almost certainly was adopted by the Soviets. Them doing things the "quick and dirty" way means safety oversights (Chernobyl, etc) and espionage (the Rosenbergs for example), it by no means implies they didn't do everything in their power to duplicate or exceed the US's capability (Tsar Bomba for example) or that those abilities disappeared after the wall fell. Granted they still use liquid propellant ICBMs (RS28) that pose storage issues vs the solid propellant ICBMs the US has (Minuteman/Trident).

I say that they might have but it seems like they won’t care about the better storage as the liquid fuels will cause problems in less than 12 years.

Ps a good book on liquids is ignition.

 

[Dotini]

I suppose we should expect tactical nukes at the first indication of a Nato or EU army headed into Ukraine. What's in the EU's arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons? Do they have a uniform doctrine for their use?

 

[CalebJ]

I suppose we should expect tactical nukes at the first indication of a Nato or EU army headed into Ukraine. What's in the EU's arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons? Do they have a uniform doctrine for their use?

No. Why on earth would we 'expect' nukes at the slightest indication of that? Certainly it's a possibility, but it's hardly a foregone conclusion.

How do you live your life on the edge of your seat waiting on the world to collapse every single day?

 

[icyclops]

Wars and rumors of wars is eternal.

Absolutely…Russia would have to hit in one sweep to nullify all of our and Nato's nuclear capability by eliminating all satellites that are known to them and all launching sites including submarines. That is not impossible, but very improbable at this time. If they are planning years out, then everything would have to line up and as we know it is extremely hard to control global situations…even though things can seem very fragile, the checks and balances are still there to make sure no one wins a nuclear war….no one.

 

[drewnickel]

Nuclear arsenals are a case of use it or lose it. You use even a tactical nuclear weapon against another nuclear power and odds are high they will retaliate in-kind, which would require immediately using your remaining arsenal or having them become targets for retaliation. The concept of mutually assured destruction has done well to keep some degree of level headedness in this conflict and the ones before it, because as belligerent and unreasonable as the leaders involved may outwardly seem, they know it's a lose-lose situation and avoiding nuclear war is the only way to win nuclear war.

 

[tim cubbedge]

I suppose we should expect tactical nukes at the first indication of a Nato or EU army headed into Ukraine. What's in the EU's arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons? Do they have a uniform doctrine for their use?

So much for spending your days watching Law and Order reruns.

 

[Dotini]

So much for spending your days watching Law and Order reruns.

I've watched all 466 of them, at least once each.

 

[techrat]

they know it's a lose-lose situation and avoiding nuclear war is the only way to win nuclear war.

Matthew Broderick: Learn, dammit.
WOPR: Interesting game. The only winning move is not to play.

For the three of you out there that have never seen the film "Wargames", made in the 1980's, the last 15 minutes of the film read like poetry rather than dialogue. It still stands as one of the best-written movies I've ever seen.