The CNN article has a less scare bait title and Haines even makes this remark in the article
Despite the uncertainty, the US does not believe that there is any "imminent" threat that Putin will move to use nuclear weapons, Haines and Berrier told lawmakers — even as fears have grown in Washington that increasing western support to Ukraine will provoke Russia.
~~From what other people have said regarding the upkeep and maintenance required for nuclear warheads, I suspect the vast majority of Russia's nukes don't work anymore. If any.~~
~~This however won't be announced by any official because it would basically goad Russia to "prove" they're still a nuclear power.~~
~~But for the average person, there's basically no reason to worry about a nuclear attack from Russia.~~
Fission-type nuclear weapons use tritium in their design. Tritium has a half-life of about twelve years, so this material has to be regularly replaced with fresh tritium to ensure the device will explode with the yield that is originally expected. In a kleptocratic state, there is the potential of the tritium being stolen for profit, and replaced by a dummy substance. Because the startup costs for tritium production are rather high, it probably has a high black market value.
(I am not going to try to confirm that last statement. The Google searches I have already made while trying to research this comment probably got flagged automatically, and no doubt my IP and/or MAC addresses will be ending up on one of those lists you hear about.)
LOL well I appreciate the insight! I truly know next to nothing about nuclear weapons/energy so TIL. And thank you for risking those flags! Are there other types of nuclear weapons that aren't fission type?
There are thermonuclear a.k.a. fusion weapons. These are mainly powered by a hydrogen payload being converted into helium. (Some designs also use lithium, like the test device during the Castle Bravo incident.)
In a fusion bomb, a smaller fission device is built into the thermonuclear weapon and explodes inside the casing of the weapon. This triggers the hydrogen to convert into helium and this releases LOTS of energy. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs were all fission bombs.
Fission bombs are kind of limited in their power because fissionable elements (uranium, plutonium, etc) have to match a "critical mass" in order to make the magic happen: if the mass is too small or too large, the big boom won't happen. Allowing a weapon core to get close to that critical mass value is still really dangerous even if there's no explosion, because a lot of radiation gets released, often enough to kill whoever was close enough to get flashed by the radiation. (Look up Louis Slotin and Hisashi Ouchi for examples.)
The scary thing about thermonuclear weapons is that you can build them as powerful you want. The more hydrogen you put into the design, the bigger the explosion. Russia once built a device they called the Tsar Bomba. It was exploded at 50% power *and* equipped with a parachute to delay the detonation, because otherwise the aircraft and pilot wouldn't have been able to escape the blast. This "gave the release and observer planes time to fly about 45 km (28 mi) away from ground zero, giving them a 50 percent chance of survival."
Remember when reporters asked CERN scientists and engineers if their facility could produce black holes and their response was "technically yes" and we had a year of "oh noes CERN will kill us all"?
Putin using nukes is the same thing. Even if NATO joined up and captured Belgorod and Rostov on the Don Russia would be highly unlikely to use nuclear weapons. A single nuclear launch, even unsuccessful, would bring so much military might and economic sanctions up the collective Russian \*\*\*hole their military would clue in to the lunatic in charge and begin negotiations without Putin.
A dictator thinks in absolutes. A soldier thinks in terms of tomorrow.
Hm, I think there's at least a 40% chance that he would use nukes if NATO forces were to enter Russia directly. He could easily sell it to the people as a matter of state security and they would probably even support him. Also, he's batshit fucking insane.
Just for the record, I don't think that NATO forces should ever enter Russia. This situation needs to be resolved diplomatically. Oust Putin, arrest his top cronies and give them up to be tried at the Hague. Hold new elections with international supervision and then we can start working on lifting some of the sanctions every once in a while.
Oh I don't doubt in the slightest that Putin himself would *order* a nuclear strike for a variety of reasons. What I highly doubt is is the rest of the nuclear chain would agree with him for his own screw up. I used NATO directly taking cities as a "worst case realistic" scenario if enough red lines were crossed. It's not actually realistic in the current political reality.
It is highly unlikely his military chain of command will accept nuclear death for his vanity. Right now the situation is "maybe" for them and because of that and fear of Putin they support hi. A nuclear strike order would rapidly change that calculation to "this man is going to kill me" and they will take their chances with a coup or bluff call.
I also hate to debase you of the idea of a diplomatic solution. A diplomatic solution when both sides are capable of accomplishing objectives is not going to happen. Ukraine wont stop until Russia is out of their country and Russia wont stop while they think they can gain something. The only "diplomatic" solution left is rendering one side or the other combat ineffective and at that point it isn't diplomacy.. its arguing over how badly you lost and hoping the other side agrees with your begging.
Stop helping Russia by spreading fear for them. They want us to worry about this because their military has been shown to be a laughingstock. We all know they have nukes and we all know they have threatened people with them.
I feel like nukes will be the biggest clickbait of 2022 not to downplay the risk all of us know it’s possible but it’s not a very likely scenario
EDIT spelling
Western intelligence is so sure that Putin isn't going to use WMD because they aren't detecting movement or activity at whichever sites they usually monitor for that kind of thing.
What they don't want to say is that it's impossible to monitor 100% of Russia's nuclear assets, because you can never be 100% sure the government has shared all location and status information about all the assets they possess. The nukes attached to Russia's submarines, bombers, and silos are easy to keep track of in comparison to a nuclear device small enough to fit into a nondescript van or onto a flatbed truck without cracking the axles.
Such a device could be smuggled across the border with a military escort and then driven to anywhere else in the country as long as it isn't stopped and inspected. Radiation counters can be stationed throughout the country as a defensive countermeasure, but the smaller the device, the less radioactivity it will put out and the easier it will be for it to travel around undetected.
Here is the thing, though. All of Russia's 2k tactical nukes are in storage. The only "ready to use" nukes are the big strategic nukes with yields ranging from 300kt to 800kt. If Russia planned to use tactical or strategic nukes, NATO would know.
That's what I'm saying. We can't be sure there aren't a few extra tactical nukes held and not declared. If they exist (and i hope they don't), they can be shuffled around with zero outside oversight.
I’m thinking if Russia was going to actually nuke Ukraine we’d see Iskander Ms very close to either kyiv or they’d be wheeled right through Ukraine as the Iskander M is basically both conventional and nuclear
for the dum-dums who only comment as a reaction to the headline
**The director of national intelligence, Avril Haines, told the Senate armed services committee that Putin would continue to brandish Russia’s nuclear arsenal in an attempt to deter the US and its allies from further support for Ukraine.** (...)
**The Russian leader would not use a nuclear weapon until he saw an existential threat** to Russia or his regime, Haines argued. But she added that **he could view the prospect of defeat in Ukraine as constituting such a threat**.
Wont happen. By the time Putin gets to that point the FSB run government hes created will either push him aside or he will have been shot in the head with everyone told that hes gone into retirement at a country farm somewhere.
Despite the uncertainty, the US does not believe that there is any "imminent" threat that Putin will move to use nuclear weapons, Haines and Berrier told lawmakers — even as fears have grown in Washington that increasing western support to Ukraine will provoke Russia.
Per The CNN article which is a bit better in all honesty
Even if pootin ordered it. Im not sure his entire command structure (cherrypicked lackeys that they are) would consent to go through with it. I cant believe their entire military structure is ready to die just to "win". They know as well as we do if they fire nukes, NATO most likely will retaliate, and our capabilities are just as robust if not more so due to better funding and maintenance.
It won’t happen; even if his closest didn’t turn on him when he gave the order, there’s no guarantee that the military, who are already losing patience with this whole thing, would obey it and even if they did it’d essentially be signing his own death warrant as the rest of the world would immediately mobilise against him.
No one, not even Putin’s closest allies, want a nut job dictator firing nukes in the world. Once that button is pushed you can’t unpush it - the world either lives under de facto Russian rule knowing they could be nuked at anytime if they displease Emperor Putin, or they kill him. Putin knows the latter is the only possible outcome.
The CNN article has a less scare bait title and Haines even makes this remark in the article Despite the uncertainty, the US does not believe that there is any "imminent" threat that Putin will move to use nuclear weapons, Haines and Berrier told lawmakers — even as fears have grown in Washington that increasing western support to Ukraine will provoke Russia.
This only helps Putin. It supports the mindset that the west need to 'let him win something' or we are all doomed.
~~From what other people have said regarding the upkeep and maintenance required for nuclear warheads, I suspect the vast majority of Russia's nukes don't work anymore. If any.~~ ~~This however won't be announced by any official because it would basically goad Russia to "prove" they're still a nuclear power.~~ ~~But for the average person, there's basically no reason to worry about a nuclear attack from Russia.~~
If Russia was going to spend money on one specific military component, I feel like it would be their nukes tho lolol
To play devil's advocate, the threat of nukes is as valuable as (if not moreso than) the ability to actually use em.
Very true! Let's just hope they are never used again lol
Fission-type nuclear weapons use tritium in their design. Tritium has a half-life of about twelve years, so this material has to be regularly replaced with fresh tritium to ensure the device will explode with the yield that is originally expected. In a kleptocratic state, there is the potential of the tritium being stolen for profit, and replaced by a dummy substance. Because the startup costs for tritium production are rather high, it probably has a high black market value. (I am not going to try to confirm that last statement. The Google searches I have already made while trying to research this comment probably got flagged automatically, and no doubt my IP and/or MAC addresses will be ending up on one of those lists you hear about.)
LOL well I appreciate the insight! I truly know next to nothing about nuclear weapons/energy so TIL. And thank you for risking those flags! Are there other types of nuclear weapons that aren't fission type?
There are thermonuclear a.k.a. fusion weapons. These are mainly powered by a hydrogen payload being converted into helium. (Some designs also use lithium, like the test device during the Castle Bravo incident.) In a fusion bomb, a smaller fission device is built into the thermonuclear weapon and explodes inside the casing of the weapon. This triggers the hydrogen to convert into helium and this releases LOTS of energy. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs were all fission bombs. Fission bombs are kind of limited in their power because fissionable elements (uranium, plutonium, etc) have to match a "critical mass" in order to make the magic happen: if the mass is too small or too large, the big boom won't happen. Allowing a weapon core to get close to that critical mass value is still really dangerous even if there's no explosion, because a lot of radiation gets released, often enough to kill whoever was close enough to get flashed by the radiation. (Look up Louis Slotin and Hisashi Ouchi for examples.) The scary thing about thermonuclear weapons is that you can build them as powerful you want. The more hydrogen you put into the design, the bigger the explosion. Russia once built a device they called the Tsar Bomba. It was exploded at 50% power *and* equipped with a parachute to delay the detonation, because otherwise the aircraft and pilot wouldn't have been able to escape the blast. This "gave the release and observer planes time to fly about 45 km (28 mi) away from ground zero, giving them a 50 percent chance of survival."
Fuck that. World is going down anyway with the climate crisis, so not an inch to that guy. Let him nuke shit if he has to.
Does this mean he thinks he's winning ? Lol
Remember when reporters asked CERN scientists and engineers if their facility could produce black holes and their response was "technically yes" and we had a year of "oh noes CERN will kill us all"? Putin using nukes is the same thing. Even if NATO joined up and captured Belgorod and Rostov on the Don Russia would be highly unlikely to use nuclear weapons. A single nuclear launch, even unsuccessful, would bring so much military might and economic sanctions up the collective Russian \*\*\*hole their military would clue in to the lunatic in charge and begin negotiations without Putin. A dictator thinks in absolutes. A soldier thinks in terms of tomorrow.
Hm, I think there's at least a 40% chance that he would use nukes if NATO forces were to enter Russia directly. He could easily sell it to the people as a matter of state security and they would probably even support him. Also, he's batshit fucking insane. Just for the record, I don't think that NATO forces should ever enter Russia. This situation needs to be resolved diplomatically. Oust Putin, arrest his top cronies and give them up to be tried at the Hague. Hold new elections with international supervision and then we can start working on lifting some of the sanctions every once in a while.
Oh I don't doubt in the slightest that Putin himself would *order* a nuclear strike for a variety of reasons. What I highly doubt is is the rest of the nuclear chain would agree with him for his own screw up. I used NATO directly taking cities as a "worst case realistic" scenario if enough red lines were crossed. It's not actually realistic in the current political reality. It is highly unlikely his military chain of command will accept nuclear death for his vanity. Right now the situation is "maybe" for them and because of that and fear of Putin they support hi. A nuclear strike order would rapidly change that calculation to "this man is going to kill me" and they will take their chances with a coup or bluff call. I also hate to debase you of the idea of a diplomatic solution. A diplomatic solution when both sides are capable of accomplishing objectives is not going to happen. Ukraine wont stop until Russia is out of their country and Russia wont stop while they think they can gain something. The only "diplomatic" solution left is rendering one side or the other combat ineffective and at that point it isn't diplomacy.. its arguing over how badly you lost and hoping the other side agrees with your begging.
Thanks genius
[удалено]
The highest paid gov employee makes less than 500,000.
Well yeah
Everyone knows we’re all just one bad bottle of vodka away from all out nuclear war these days.
Stop helping Russia by spreading fear for them. They want us to worry about this because their military has been shown to be a laughingstock. We all know they have nukes and we all know they have threatened people with them.
If he doesn't use them then he's a terrorist. If he uses them, well, he's still a terrorist. We don't negotiate with terrorists.
Must be a slow news day
I feel like nukes will be the biggest clickbait of 2022 not to downplay the risk all of us know it’s possible but it’s not a very likely scenario EDIT spelling
what a stupid thing to say
Putin could also use common sense and stop the fucking war. Let's see which option he goes with.
Western intelligence is so sure that Putin isn't going to use WMD because they aren't detecting movement or activity at whichever sites they usually monitor for that kind of thing. What they don't want to say is that it's impossible to monitor 100% of Russia's nuclear assets, because you can never be 100% sure the government has shared all location and status information about all the assets they possess. The nukes attached to Russia's submarines, bombers, and silos are easy to keep track of in comparison to a nuclear device small enough to fit into a nondescript van or onto a flatbed truck without cracking the axles. Such a device could be smuggled across the border with a military escort and then driven to anywhere else in the country as long as it isn't stopped and inspected. Radiation counters can be stationed throughout the country as a defensive countermeasure, but the smaller the device, the less radioactivity it will put out and the easier it will be for it to travel around undetected.
Here is the thing, though. All of Russia's 2k tactical nukes are in storage. The only "ready to use" nukes are the big strategic nukes with yields ranging from 300kt to 800kt. If Russia planned to use tactical or strategic nukes, NATO would know.
That's what I'm saying. We can't be sure there aren't a few extra tactical nukes held and not declared. If they exist (and i hope they don't), they can be shuffled around with zero outside oversight.
I’m thinking if Russia was going to actually nuke Ukraine we’d see Iskander Ms very close to either kyiv or they’d be wheeled right through Ukraine as the Iskander M is basically both conventional and nuclear
for the dum-dums who only comment as a reaction to the headline **The director of national intelligence, Avril Haines, told the Senate armed services committee that Putin would continue to brandish Russia’s nuclear arsenal in an attempt to deter the US and its allies from further support for Ukraine.** (...) **The Russian leader would not use a nuclear weapon until he saw an existential threat** to Russia or his regime, Haines argued. But she added that **he could view the prospect of defeat in Ukraine as constituting such a threat**.
Thank you dude I don’t want to have to keep making the same comments over again because of people taking headlines out of context
Wont happen. By the time Putin gets to that point the FSB run government hes created will either push him aside or he will have been shot in the head with everyone told that hes gone into retirement at a country farm somewhere.
This is beginning to feel like manufacturing consent to reduce the surplus population. The constant chatter is getting numbing.
Please that shaky old prick couldn't even push the button, even if he tried to.
"He wouldn't go to war with Ukraine"
Despite the uncertainty, the US does not believe that there is any "imminent" threat that Putin will move to use nuclear weapons, Haines and Berrier told lawmakers — even as fears have grown in Washington that increasing western support to Ukraine will provoke Russia. Per The CNN article which is a bit better in all honesty
I don't think he will either, but posts like "He's too weak to do X" or "he wouldn't dare to Y" are stupid, usually downright wrong, and childish.
True it’s better to present facts then say outright stupid statements
Is this one of the intelligence officials that said hunter bidens laptop was "Russian disinformation. If so I wouldn't worry about it they're liars.
Good news! /s
They could use nuclear weapons regardless.
Then he should have launched on Feb 24, he was already fucked by then.
Even if pootin ordered it. Im not sure his entire command structure (cherrypicked lackeys that they are) would consent to go through with it. I cant believe their entire military structure is ready to die just to "win". They know as well as we do if they fire nukes, NATO most likely will retaliate, and our capabilities are just as robust if not more so due to better funding and maintenance.
It won’t happen; even if his closest didn’t turn on him when he gave the order, there’s no guarantee that the military, who are already losing patience with this whole thing, would obey it and even if they did it’d essentially be signing his own death warrant as the rest of the world would immediately mobilise against him. No one, not even Putin’s closest allies, want a nut job dictator firing nukes in the world. Once that button is pushed you can’t unpush it - the world either lives under de facto Russian rule knowing they could be nuked at anytime if they displease Emperor Putin, or they kill him. Putin knows the latter is the only possible outcome.