talkpolitics | Entries tagged with nukes

Lol. As if we have anything to fear or concern ourselves with from a Navy that's so pathetic it's lost, and continues to lose, huge chunks of its fleet to an opponent without one. Embarrassing:

Russian warships will arrive in Havana next week, say Cuban officials citing ‘friendly relations’

Russian ships have to make it to Cuba first. They probably had to borrow money from China to pay for the fuel. A bit on the extreme side of caution but they should be safe from Ukrainian attacks there. ;-)

One more thing. Think we can expect Putin to do lots of things in his continuing efforts to get his little buddy re elected. Of course Republicans appreciate all of his efforts and will pay him back someday.

fridi

See, I've got a very squicky theory about Graham: Was McCain the only one tell him to take his meds? :p

Lindsey Graham suggests Israel should nuke Gaza and claims Hiroshima bomb was ‘the right thing’

In all seriousness, there are some times that it seems like not a lot of anything is going on in his brain these days. From my understanding, Hiroshima was the first bomb dropped, so that was needed to coerce Japan into surrendering, or else risk the loss of life of too many soldiers. If I remember correctly, Japan was basically in the middle of surrendering when the bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, and that was not the one that was needed, at least not so soon to Hiroshima. Memory of this history lesson is fuzzy, however.

But back to Graham. Even if he didn't mean it, it's psycho to even talk about nuking a country as a talking point. The second anyone drops a nuke on anyone, we will be in WWIII because all the radicals in the Mid-East will go no holds barred.

Like... don't even joke. We do not want to see those horrors. Pardon my language but these total fucking privileged, bougie idiots in Washington know nothing about the horrors of war. And if war happens, they will be the most comfortable and protected while the rest of the world deals with it. They need to visit the Hiroshima museum and maybe Auschwitz too while they're at it and get a goddamn reality check.

fridi

Medvedev is obviously the man Putin uses as a mouthpiece for his more bellicose threats. Which is kind of funny, given that Medvedev used to be seen as the 'dove' to Putin's 'hawk' in this relationship.

Putin pal's 'nuclear' threat of a '9/11-style attack' on eve of anniversary

If you knew anything about Russia, however, the Russians have never telegraphed their intentions. Whatever they say is merely rhetoric. It's when the're quiet that you have to worry.

Having said that, I would need to see an official translation by an impartial translator.

kiaa

Russia has an arsenal of 4,477 nuclear weapons. Of these, 1,588 are strategic warheads deployed on ballistic missiles, launched from silos, mobile installations, ships, submarines or heavy bombers. And another 977 strategic warheads as well as 1,912 non-strategic warheads are kept in reserve. In addition, about 1,500 Russian nuclear weapons have been declared obsolete and need to be dismantled. This is shown by the data of the Federation of American Scientists.

Having this in mind, let's see under what conditions is it possible for the conflict in Ukraine to escalate into a nuclear war? In such a development, at a first glance, everyone would lose, but that still doesn't make such a scenario impossible.

( Read more... )

asthfghl

Nuclear war is a moronic threat. Only a nation controlled by a someone or someones with absolutely nothing to lose and enough power/perceived authority to order an underling to cause the extinction of the human race and have that order obeyed would launch one.

Nobody puts nuclear war on the table because it's always on the table. Everything is always on the table no matter what anyone says for the simple reason that no divine intervention is going to say "no" if someone decides to do something that wasn't on the table.

China State Media Says Country Must Prepare for Nuclear War With U.S. After Biden Asks for COVID Probe

While there are many reasons to organize against China, some dipshit on state media grunting about nuclear war isn't one of them.

That said, the next few years will definitely be a test for the Biden administration, and the will of the US and its ability to build an international coalition to confront an ever-growing geopolitical challenge that is China. This is a very complicated and difficult issue because of the deep economic ties for all sides involved, and I'm not just talking about the US but also the rest of the world. We've seen China being able to influence media, Hollywood, sports, etc around the world, even in the US.

The same way China, Iran, Russia and some other are looking for ways to move away from their financial dependence on the dollar, the Western camp may need to start building a global campaign to divest from China. On the other hand, being so tightly linked economically might be the only thing preventing a major showdown right now, so I'm split on this issue. Thoughts?

fridi

The assassination of Iranian nuclear scientist Fahrizadeh in late November (considered the father of the Iranian nuclear program) has angered Tehran, as could be expected. The first response was passing a bill that allowed their government to block UN inspections from accessing their nuclear sites, and speeding up the uranium enrichment - provided that the crippling sanctions are not lifted in two months. But still, the public statements of their officials indicated hat they still haven't written off possible negotiations with the US.

Iran doesn't want to look weak, and of course it's hard to ignore the hardliners within the Iranian political elites. But the Iranians could gain from sticking to the policy of strategic patience. Joe Biden is about to get sworn in in about a month, so it's worth the wait.

Fahrizdeh's murder is believed to be Israel's work, and it was probably blessed by Trump. From where I'm standing this looks like he's doing his best to undermine any last prospects of Iranian-US diplomacy in his final days at the White House. But if Iran manages to hold their anger for a while more and wait for Biden to step in, the two sides would have a real chance to get back to the table.

( Read more... )

nairiporter

U.S. approved secret nuclear power work for Saudi Arabia

It seems Trump's administration was secretly transferring nuclear technologies to Saudi Arabia shortly after Jammal Khashoggi's murder in Virginia. Actually just over a fortnight after the October incident (that was the first shipment). The second batch was sent in February.

This is a serious threat to the stability of the Middle East, which is not the most stable place on Earth as it is.

This puts Trump's decision from last month into new context: he decided to declare emergency because of the tensions with Iran, aiming to bypass Congress in selling arms to Saudi Arabia, UAE and Jordan worth a total of 8.1 billion dollars.

( Read more... )

kiaa

A few minutes ago the so-called President did the predictable and scuttled the Iran Nuclear Deal. He's doing it to fulfill a campaign promise so that he can brag about it on the midterm campaign trail. And if everything goes sour and Iran develops a nuke, he'll just blame it on Obama and Kerry. It's a win-win for him. And a loss for the rest of humanity. That's how shit goes in the age of Trump:

What could Iran do if Trump pulls out of nuclear deal?

The cynical me, I'm guessing the only significant thing that will happen now that the US has pulled out is the price of gas will go above $4.00 a gallon. Trump will blame that on Obama too, of course, and demand that the US drill more oil off the coast of North and South Carolina.

It also means Trump will have to share cock holster duties between Putin and Netanyahu... when he's not golfing and watching TV, that is.

Trump's hatred of everything Obama has progressed from obsession to insanity. Anything Obama did he's ready to undo, regardless of the consequences to anyone else. Vengeful, hateful, vindictive fool. When a sick person becomes jealous of another human being, they tend to get consumed with proving that they are somehow more relevant and superior. Everyone else be damned.

fridi

A few days ago Nikki Haley, the US ambassador to the UN provided a glimpse into Trump's plans for his policy towards Iran. Sure, the details are yet to be forged out, but the international community got the idea. And things ain't looking good at all:

Haley lays out case for US to leave Iran deal

Trump himself is going to announce his intentions about Iran next month. But Ms Haley is preparing the world with what her boss perceives to be a long list of Iranian transgressions, making the case for the upcoming confrontation.

It's a long list really, and the accusations are serious. Given the events in Syria, the list will probably be growing even longer. Because Iran is about to turn Syria into its colony, as regional observers are so eager to point out. As far-fetched as such an assessment may sound, it's not exactly groundless.

All of this could serve as an excuse for scrapping the nuclear deal with Iran. Because Iran's regional ambitions are not subject to that agreement, and they're pretty obvious. As are the US ones.

( Read more... )

halialkers

Well, in the last few days, things have escalated very rapidly indeed with North Korea, illustrating ultimately that the world escaped the tragedy of a Cold War nuclear crisis to get the farce that may well finally end the nuclear taboo with North Korea and Donald Trump's America.

( North Korea goes from sadly amusing to genuinely frightening )

( A crucial bit of context that changes the pucker factor not a bit )

( Trump goes Trumanesque )

Nuclear war with North Korea, and a President who was a source of satire for old cartoons and the basis of the villain in an 80s sci-fi film.

This would be the scenario of a grimdark satire in any other reality, but it is the one that actually exists.

And the worst bit is that it would literally matter not at all who won the Presidential election in the USA here. North Korea was developing these weapons since the George W. Bush years. It ended the armistice of Panmunjom in 2013, at one stroke ending all diplomatic possibilities it could use in favor of a cycle that ultimately only ends in a nuclear exchange. Other Presidents wouldn't use Trumanesque rhetoric posturing about nuclear weapons, perhaps, but the broader geopolitical picture would be no different, nor would the existential threat of a nuclear war.

And when, not if, the cycle continues to escalate unless somehow it's broken and neither Trump nor North Korea seem to care overmuch to do that, the nuclear taboo will finally be shattered.

And when it is, the chain leading to a global nuclear exchange of some sort shifts up tremendously quick as the Chinese are unlikely to accept a US nuclear strike next to their border without flexing their own arsenal, and the Chinese lack the military ability to deal as much damage to the USA as it can do to it. Scary times, to be sure.

halialkers

So, as was recently shown, North Korea has indeed developed ICBMs that give it the capacity now to strike US soil, specifically Alaska (not that there'd be anything of actual value beyond wildlife lost if they did).
( Iraq and North Korea: Axis of Idiotic US fixations )

( Context in all its morbid and even hilarious irony )

( The Cold War repeated as farce )

Of such morbid irony is the whim of reality, which unlike fiction needs no pretense of consistency or event A logically and neatly following from a cause that would indicate that this event could become that one.

underlankers.livejournal.com

Even when the nuclear state directly suspended the armistice it claimed to adhere to years ago.

( Also a cut )
Personally I hope nothing comes of this but with this Administration there is no certainty that it'll be the usual pantomime and same old con artist game on the part of the USA and North Korea alike. And that lack of certainty with not one but two scenarios involving other nuclear states is ah......not the best route by any means.

underlankers.livejournal.com

So, not satisfied with merely sending a carrier to the Indian Ocean, Dorito Benito has decided to treat nuclear weapons deployments to counter a nuclear state perfectly happy to use them on South Korea and Japan as a first option.
( Cut )

I guess Dorito Benito wasn't kidding when he said he wanted to fire the damned things off.

tcpip.livejournal.com

The lurching continues! The week began with the savvy explanation by Lord Dampnut that the media is the enemy of the people. Several individuals made the point that describing a press independent of the government in such a way is usually a rather totalitarian attitude. Still, having decided that media is the enemy he did hold his first post-election rally which some suggest looked suggestive of a 2020 election campaign. Personally I think it was narcassistic cry for affirmation.

The following day, the "enemy of the people" was presenting reports that Lord Dampnut's team had been working on a plan to use the National Guard to round up illegal immigrants. White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer denied the report as "100 per cent false" on Twitter (here it is, however it soon emerged that the memo had been circulating and had been under consideration for at least three weeks.

Clearly it is impossible to get through a week without an opportunity for comic ridicule, so the following day the baffling suggestion of terrorist attacks "last night" in Sweden led provided not only a request for clarification from the Swedish government but also the opportunity for Swedes themselves to offer suggestions.

Returning to bravado the week ended with Lord Dampnut's proposal to rebuild the United State's nuclear arsenal to be "top of the pack". So rather than encourage other countries to reduce their arsenals, the suggestion is to start a new nuclear arm's race. For those who live through the 1980s and witnessed to gradual removal of the threat of nuclear was in that period, the prospect is frankly terrifying. Still, Lord Dampnut did promise to have a plan to defeat ISIS in thirty days. Perhaps this is it, more nukes. What could possibly go wrong?

underlankers.livejournal.com

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/274812-white-house-counters-trump-catastrophic-if-japan-south-korea-get

So, Trump makes a silly statement about US support of nuclear proliferation that's supposedly disastrous. Yes, in theory the USA should not have supported nuclear proliferation. It would indeed be a simpler world if Washington and Moscow alone had nukes, not Washington, Moscow, Paris, Beijing, Karachi, New Delhi, and anyone else I forgot to mention. Only one problem here: the USA does enable around 400 nuclear weapons in a Cold War-style triad used by Israel in a literal intent to destroy the Middle East and if some reports are right a significant portion of the EU with Israel if it ever gets into a real war again and loses it badly (and when Israel has this possible intention and then wonders why the EU doesn't give it affection, how predictably ironic and hypocritical).

Of all states, the USA included, with nuclear weapons, only one ever gave them up: the Republic of South Africa. One could just as easily argue that nuclear proliferation guarantees peace for the same reason that the nuclear weapons in existence have forestalled yet another general Great Power conflict and thus to a degree nuclear proliferation might be good in the sense that it makes the doomsday option and peace by guaranteed annihilation almost inevitable.

Whatever one's feelings, however, the idea that the USA does oppose nuclear proliferation is a farce. It has done nothing whatsoever to halt it with Pakistan and Israel, US allies, India, US frenemy, or North Korea, global trainwreck waiting to implode South Korea and the entire region it's in with it whenever the final death spiral happens. There is no logic whatsoever for how Pakistan and India and North Korea getting nuclear weapons is not destabilizing (the moreso since India and Pakistan are the only nuclear powers likely to directly fight each other on the battlefield and since Pakistan's already collapsed once) but South Korea and Japan getting them is.

Ah, realpolitik. What an enabling of cowardice, thuggery, and opportunism thou art.

underlankers.livejournal.com

http://thediplomat.com/2013/01/02/pakistans-new-nuclear-problem/?all=true

So nowadays Pakistan, in its infinite wisdom, has decided to revive the old tactical nuke concept of the Cold War, and showing that its problem is not the absence of balls (brains, yes, balls no) is using US plans for WWIII with the USSR to justify this. Leaving aside that the USA did not use tactical nuclear weapons (and for that matter that Pershings and the like were not tactical nuclear weapons, but strategic), the reality is that Pakistan is a huge, impoverished, unstable country riddled by religious fanaticism. It has already fought the only war in modern times where two nuclear powers went to war directly, not via proxy. Tactical nuclear weapons were considered a bad idea by the superpowers in an age when calmly planning out a war that could have only ended civilization in nuclear fire was all the rage.

Now the idea is once again being revived by a country which again has collapsed once, and is appealing to plans for the end of civilization as we know it as a justification. Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn how they're justifying it, I see only bad things coming out of this.

What say you?

peristaltor.livejournal.com

On December 8, 1953, President Eisenhower made an address to the 470th Plenary Meeting of the United Nations General Assembly, a speech now called the Atoms for Peace speech. In it, he noted that the US and the USSR, both with atomic weapons, had the power to do unspeakable damage to the planet if those weapons were ever actually used, and which resulted in a stalemate now called the Cold War, where the two nuclear superpowers reserved the right to destroy each other if one flinched:

To pause there would be to confirm the hopeless finality of a belief that two atomic colossi are doomed malevolently to eye each other indefinitely across a trembling world. To stop there would be to accept helplessly the probability of civilization destroyed, the annihilation of the irreplaceable heritage of mankind handed down to us from generation to generation, and the condemnation of mankind to begin all over again the age-old struggle upward from savagery towards decency, and right, and justice. Surely no sane member of the human race could discover victory in such desolation.

Pres. Eisenhower then continued, suggesting an alternative direction to a hopeless standoff. He proposed formation of a UN-led "international atomic energy agency" to "be made responsible for the impounding,storage and protection of the contributed fissionable and other materials" and, more importantly, "to devise methods whereby this fissionable material would be allocated to serve the peaceful pursuits of mankind."

Experts would be mobilized to apply atomic energy to the needs of agriculture, medicine and other peaceful activities. A special purpose would be to provide abundant electrical energy in the power-starved areas of the world.

Thus the contributing Powers would be dedicating some of their strength to serve the needs rather than the fears of mankind.

Here's some interesting alternate history fodder: ( What if the US had actually followed this path to peace? )

NB: I'm pulling double shifts at work all week, so this is a quickie, full of the flaws most quickies have. If I do further research on this and find it to be full of crap, I'll note such a thing later.

luvdovz.livejournal.com

There are entire towns in Russia with an access regime resembling that of concentration camps. Their residents don't have the right to host guests at home, except on some extraordinary occasions. There are currently 42 publicly acknowledged "closed cities" (as they're called) in Russia, with a total population of 1.5 million people. Most of them are administered by the Ministry of Defense, some by the Federal Atomic Energy Agency. There are allegedly another 15 closed cities around Siberia, but their location remains a state secret.

Take Ozyorsk for example. It's in the Chelyabinsk Oblast in the Urals, some 1600 km away from Moscow. The "Mayak" (Lighthouse) plant is located next to the town, where nuclear waste is being processed. In Soviet times the Mayak used to produce plutonium for the nuclear bombs of the Russkies. In 1957 a huge accident happened there, a container with 80 tons of radioactive waste exploded. Thousands of people across the Urals were evacuated, many subsequently died. Even today large portions of the mountain separating Europe from Asia are uninhabited. But that's not a story many people in the West have heard, although it was as serious as Chernobyl.

( Living in "the box" )

sophia-sadek.livejournal.com

Children attending middle school today have no direct experience of the events that led to the quagmire in Afghanistan. Likewise, they have no experience of the pre-9/11 world. They have grown up in a time and place that bears the imprint of that tragic act of war and all of the knee-jerk stupidity that followed in its wake.

A comparable event for people of my generation might be the construction of the Berlin Wall or, better, the Cuban Missile Crisis. It was an event that left a lasting impression on the adults and older children of our youth. Its trauma was tangible given that it was the closest the US and USSR got to a full blown exchange of nuclear munitions. The fear left a mark on those who lived it while the youngest of us picked up on it in a second-hand fashion. It seemed as if the world was always that way just as today's middle school students know nothing of life before Homeland Security and the Patriot Act.

The collapse of the Soviet Union has made it possible for us to get a glimpse of the machinations behind the scenes in Moscow. A. A. Fursenko and Timothy Naftali published a joint study of the event as an East/West collaboration. The work includes the impression that IRBM (intermediate range ballistic missile) deployment by US/UK/NATO in England, Italy, and Turkey made on Soviet leaders. These missiles were brought up in the negotiations over withdrawal of Soviet MRBs and IRBMs from Cuba. Another historian, Philip Nash, has published an account of these other missiles and President Kennedy's secret agreement to dismantle them.

The event left us with expressions such as being eyeball to eyeball when the other guy blinked as well as an eloquent description of a rope upon which the knot of war is tied. Dean Rusk, the American Secretary of State at the time, describes the origin of the "eyeball to eyeball" remark in his personal memoir.

Kennedy came away from the event with mixed reviews. He was seen as a strong leader in the eyes of some and a spineless wimp in the eyes of others. Although Kennedy achieved the withdrawal of Soviet IRBMs from Cuba, he promised in return not to invade Cuba and to dismantle American IRBMs. This did not sit well with hard line anti-Communists at the time. Although the removal of the missiles occurred months later, their removal was suspected as a concession to the Soviets. It turned out to be an accurate suspicion since Kennedy's promise to Khrushchev included a removal time frame that was adhered to.

( Missile photos beneath the cut. )

Do you have any observations on US/Soviet/Cuban relations to mark this 50th anniversary of the Missile Crisis? Are there any lessons from that event that political leaders today can learn from?

Links: Fursenko and Naftali's book, One Hell of a Gamble. Philip Nash's book, The Other Missiles of October. Khrushchev's "knot of war" letter. Dean Rusk's memoir, As I Saw It.

meus-ovatio.livejournal.com

( News! )

Credits & Style Info

Talk Politics.

A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods

MONTHLY TOPIC:
AI Regulation: Striking the Balance

DAILY QUOTE:

"Clearly, the penguins have finally gone too far. First they take our hearts, now they’re tanking the global economy one smug waddle at a time. Expect fish sanctions by Friday."

(nairiporter)

July 2025

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31

Talk politics.

A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods.

Entries tagged with nukes

Things were working out so well for the Black Sea Fleet

This guy is insane

Words, and more words

Vlad's nuclear option

Empty threats, yeah

A chance for diplomacy

Do we really want a nuclear Saudi Arabia?

Iran Deal ist kaput

The consequences of stupidity

And lo, the shit doth hit the fan:

Everything old is new again:

DW Repost: Prudent isn't my word for this idiocy involving a nuclear state:

Reposted from DW/OK this is even stupider:

The Shambling Mound's Fifth Week

From the Department of locking the barn door after the horse has been stolen and made into glue:

This can't end well at all:

A Safer Nuclear Future?

Russia's secret towns

In the Rearview Mirror: The Cuban Missile Crisis‏

Small Town Hit By Surgical Strike US Military Confirms

Credits & Style Info

Links

July 2025

Summary