Current Affairs Ukraine

[tsubaki]

I am just questioning the solidity of the concept of MAD. And tbf its something that has been challenged before. In your opinion the concept is rock solid and unquestionable. I dont think it is in the modern day. We've seen potential evidence of its flakiness in this conflict already.

MAD has always been questioned, ever since it was developed as a concept. Traditionally the reason to question it was always around developing technological means to prevent suffering that destruction though, like the development of ABMs and then SDI, the “missile shield” and so on.

The underlying assumption (that a nuke would be the response to a nuke) is I think widely understood by everyone.

 

[Tramps_mate]

MAD has always been questioned, ever since it was developed as a concept. Traditionally the reason to question it was always around developing technological means to prevent suffering that destruction though, like the development of ABMs and then SDI, the “missile shield” and so on.

The underlying assumption (that a nuke would be the response to a nuke) is I think widely understood by everyone.

I think that's what will prevent Putin from ever firing one. Our defence systems would in likelihood shoot anything down and we would fire back and obliterate Russian targets. They'd hit government and military sites before the Russians could blink.

 

[Kev The Rat]

MAD has always been questioned, ever since it was developed as a concept. Traditionally the reason to question it was always around developing technological means to prevent suffering that destruction though, like the development of ABMs and then SDI, the “missile shield” and so on.

The underlying assumption (that a nuke would be the response to a nuke) is I think widely understood by everyone.

Not according to Medvedev, who you may not take seriously but still, this is what he said:

Nuclear weapons on the table if Ukraine counteroffensive succeeds: Russia’s Medvedev

There would be ‘no other way out’ if Kyiv takes Russian territory, says the former Russian president and current National Security Council deputy chairman.

www.politico.eu

Medvedev had said that the war in Ukraine could be “brought to an end within a few days” by doing what “the Americans did in 1945 when they deployed nuclear weapons and bombed two Japanese cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”

 

[Kev The Rat]

I think that's what will prevent Putin from ever firing one. Our defence systems would in likelihood shoot anything down and we would fire back and obliterate Russian targets. They'd hit government and military sites before the Russians could blink.

so you are saying their nukes would fail but ours wouldnt

ok............

 

[tsubaki]

I think that's what will prevent Putin from ever firing one. Our defence systems would in likelihood shoot anything down and we would fire back and obliterate Russian targets. They'd hit government and military sites before the Russians could blink.

I disagree, I don’t think our defences (at least in the U.K.) would do that at all. At least publicly we do not possess a ground based SAM system in the Patriot / Arrow / S400 class (as in capable of intercepting an inbound ballistic missile).

 

[tsubaki]

Not according to Medvedev, who you may not take seriously but still, this is what he said:

Nuclear weapons on the table if Ukraine counteroffensive succeeds: Russia’s Medvedev

There would be ‘no other way out’ if Kyiv takes Russian territory, says the former Russian president and current National Security Council deputy chairman.

www.politico.eu

Medvedev had said that the war in Ukraine could be “brought to an end within a few days” by doing what “the Americans did in 1945 when they deployed nuclear weapons and bombed two Japanese cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”

Kev I would love it if you read posts; I’ve said at least twice that the use of a nuclear weapon on Ukraine would probably result in different consequences than the use of a nuclear weapon on the close ally of a nuclear weapons state.

Plus, we were talking about MAD which is not an issue when one side doesn’t have them.

 

[Kev The Rat]

Kev I would love it if you read posts; I’ve said at least twice that the use of a nuclear weapon on Ukraine would probably result in different consequences than the use of a nuclear weapon on the close ally of a nuclear weapons state.

Plus, we were talking about MAD which is not an issue when one side doesn’t have them.

What Medvedev is saying, presumably, is that a nuke or 2 on Ukraine would result in US surrender - rather than any form of retaliation.

I guess you dont agree with him.

 

[dublinbluenose]

I disagree, I don’t think our defences (at least in the U.K.) would do that at all. At least publicly we do not possess a ground based SAM system in the Patriot / Arrow / S400 class (as in capable of intercepting an inbound ballistic missile).

The Sky Sabre is the UK equivalent of the Patriot system afaik.

 

[Tramps_mate]

so you are saying their nukes would fail but ours wouldnt

ok............

Quite probably Yes. I think you over estimate the Russians capabilities. If faced with multiple (dozens) of missiles being fired from all directions they stand no chance. Missiles will be fired from UK, US, Israel, Europe and other nuclear silos that the UK and US have around the world. The Russian government and military would be finished in a day, and sadly a lot of Russian people too.

However, for this reason it will never happen.

 

[bcblue1878]

No need for personal attacks is there. It’s usually the sign of someone who is losing a discussion……

He doesn’t do discussion, previously his tactic was personal attack then if you continue to try and discuss he throws in the “putting you on ignore” line! I was apparently no’4 on his list before he was kicked out of this thread previously, I reckon there were at least another 10 or so after me!

 

[tsubaki]

What Medvdev is saying, presuamably, is that a nuke or 2 on Ukraine woud result in US surrender - rather than any form of retaliation.

I guess you dont agree with him.

Well for a start I don’t think that is what he was saying to begin with - he was saying that they’d use nukes if Ukraine took away a part of Russia as per the decree of 2020.

That decree said they would use nukes if a nuke ir other WMD was used against them or their allies or if the existence of the state was put at risk by a state using conventional weapons. Politico (and others) conflated this with the threats made some time previously to win the war quickly by using nukes like the US did to Japan.

So the question remains of what level of threat the Ukrainian counteroffensive would have to pose in order for the decree to apply. His intention was probably to scare people into thinking he means the four part- annexed oblasts, but would losing them constitute a threat to the existence of the Russian state? When even their own allies don’t recognise the annexation?


L

 

[Mutzo Nutzo]

I disagree, I don’t think our defences (at least in the U.K.) would do that at all. At least publicly we do not possess a ground based SAM system in the Patriot / Arrow / S400 class (as in capable of intercepting an inbound ballistic missile).

In theory we don’t need that capability in the U.K.

An ICBM or SRBM could be taken out in its terminal phase by European based systems,

AEGIS ashore in Poland and Romania
Patriot PAC-3 in Germany and Holland

there are also Patriot PAC-3 systems in the U.K. based at USAF airbases at Bentwaters. Alconbury and Mildenhall

Apart from all of that we would have a couple of RN type 45 destroyers parked off the coast.

 

[peteblue]

To be fair he's received his fair share of personal attacks.

Not from me…..

 

[davids]

I think that's what will prevent Putin from ever firing one. Our defence systems would in likelihood shoot anything down and we would fire back and obliterate Russian targets. They'd hit government and military sites before the Russians could blink.

Both Russia and China have operational hypersonic missiles nobody in NATO does. Shooting down an ICBM would be some feat.

 

[davids]

Not from me…..

Never said they were from you.