Nuclear Weapons & War Discussion Thread

[Lord of the Large Pants]

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/25/world/europe/putin-russia-nuclear-doctrine.html

https://archive.is/3Ed5M

Russia seems to have changed their nuclear doctrine. It allows nuclear launch in case of a direct attack from a nation backed by a nuclear power. In other words, if Ukraine hits back.

How fucked are we?

 

[Jewthulhu]

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/25/world/europe/putin-russia-nuclear-doctrine.html

https://archive.is/3Ed5M

Russia seems to have changed their nuclear doctrine. It allows nuclear launch in case of a direct attack from a nation backed by a nuclear power. In other words, if Ukraine hits back.

How fucked are we?

I suspect it's brinkmanship. Western aid to Ukraine has been a thorn in Russia's side since day 1, and they want to do everything they can to shake it. Nuclear threats are one of the most powerful tools they have to do that.

Spoiler: More technical explanation

Probably one of the most overlooked aspects of the "escalation ladder" metaphor are what are known as "thresholds." Thresholds are psychological barriers on the ladder that discourage further escalation. Probably one of the most powerful thresholds is the nuclear use threshold. Nobody wants nuclear use, so as that threshold is approached, there's mounting psychological pressure on both sides to prevent further escalation, to resolve the conflict, or to deescalate. However, a shrewd actor can use this psychological pressure to try to manipulate the other side. There's a concept of "escalate to deescalate," where one actor escalates a conflict close to a threshold in hopes of putting pressure to deescalate the conflict to a more favorable level. What Putin is doing here, I suspect, is something similar. He's essentially announcing that he's lowering the threshold of nuclear use, in the hopes of pressuring the west to deescalate the conflict to something more favorable to Russia.

Realistically, I'd look at it this way: What does Russia have to gain from actually deploying nuclear weapons? A demolished strip of land of dubious value that wasn't theirs to begin with. What do they have to lose? Fucking everything. It would be madness to do so. Putin might be a madman, but it's more likely he's playing one.

 

[Jewthulhu]

I suspect it's brinkmanship. Western aid to Ukraine has been a thorn in Russia's side since day 1, and they want to do everything they can to shake it. Nuclear threats are one of the most powerful tools they have to do that.

Related
CSIS - Why Russia Is Changing Its Nuclear Doctrine Now (L) (A)

 

[Dawdler]

I've mentioned this several times when articles are posted about Russia making threats, but I have serious doubts about Russia's nuclear arsenal. Hydrogen bombs require a LOT of upkeep and their tritium needs to be replaced every decade or so because it has a short half-life. Tritium is very expensive and difficult to produce in large amounts. That's why tritium sights for firearms are so expensive. It's one of the most expensive materials known, and thermonuclear weapons need quite a bit of it. Not to mention the other systems on nuclear warheads that need maintenance.

That's why all thermonuclear weapons make tritium on spot.

And then there's the missiles themselves. Both liquid and solid fueled rockets require a lot of upkeep.

No they really don't. 10 years is pretty normal lifetime for them. 54 years old tech:

https://www.vandenberg.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3798530/

Russia during its war in Ukraine, it's that they are really rather terrible at keeping everything in prime operational condition, or even serviceable condition.

That's why they fire their semi functional junk at ukraine

And then there's a problem that both Russia and the US are facing: all the people who designed and built the current weapons are all either dead or little old men in retirement homes.

In US yes. In russia, no.

I remember reading within the past couple years that the US lost how to make a specific kind of aerogel important to US thermonuclear weapons designs because it was so top secret that the recipe for making it was never written down and there was no one around any longer who remembered how to make it.

Fogbank

Has every warhead and every missile and every bomber received the time and money it required to stay operational?

No, that's why they have many rockets.
Bombers are obsolete tech nowdays as you can drive up a sub to a coast of ny, turn whole city into glass and drive away.

I personally think Russia has not kept it's nuclear arsenal maintained. I'm sure they've maintained what they could, but I highly doubt every warhead and missile are ready to be launched.

They know that, that's why they make more every day.
Plutonium cores need to be remelted every 5 years to keep it's high yield. Such reman weapons are actually more powerful than the original versions since fast decaying shit died in mean time.

I think Russia is insecure about their nuclear readiness and overcompensate by threatening to use nukes at every minor provocation, hoping to frighten any nuclear adversary from attacking because they know they can't fully retaliate and would receive way worse than they can give back.

It worked so far.

 

[The Dude]

@Dawdler "It worked so far". No, not really. Practically every "red line" that Russia has threatened nuclear retaliation if crossed has been well and truly crossed, including "sovereign Russian soil" being attacked. The Ukrainians have held a large chunk of the Kursk Oblast for about a month now and zip. I think the only two red lines that haven't been crossed are Ukrain being allowed to use long range weapons to attack Russia directly and allied troops getting involved in the conflict, and both are being openly discussed as a possibility since Putin's threats have been empty thus far.

 

[Dawdler]

You are forgetting how pissed americans were over russians putting missiles on cuba that they embargoed the whole country up to this day.
It works because we aren't glowing right now and some incursions can be dealt with conventional weapons. Russia has enough weapons to level every city on earth and so do americans. I have no idea why every common Joe has to support nuclear annihilation. Nuclear weapons are a deterrent. If you want to know how big, look how upset US/ME/Allies are over Iran getting their own badaboom.

 

[Thorndyke Special]

Fun and interesting thread. Can someone talk about how things might play out if a general tried to stop the president from implementing the SIOP (or whatever the new plan is called) might be? I remember reading articles about General Milley being in contact with his Chinese equivalent and making nuclear policy promises after the election in case Trump decided to deploy nuclear weapons (lol). I guess it just got me thinking about what things might look like if something had jumped off in Taiwan and the President decided to go nuclear but the chairman of the joint chiefs wanted to stop it.

Edit here's an example of one of the articles I was remembering: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/milita...using-nuclear-weapons-war-china-book-n1279187

 

[ChefBourgeoisie]

what things might look like if something had jumped off in Taiwan and the President decided to go nuclear but the chairman of the joint chiefs wanted to stop it.

As I understand things, the joint chiefs can strongly advise the president, but no one's putting up with their shit if they refuse. The president would fire them, even over the phone, and have them hand it over to their subordinates who would then be ordered to proceed.

The cabinet is a different beast altogether. Presumably they're in the room too, and they do have the power to remove the president and put the VP in charge (25th amendment). This might not last, in a slow burn situation the ousted president might get SCROTUS involved and weasel out of it, but in some sort of hot scenario they could at least shut it down temporarily so that public opinion could sway everyone away from a nuclear strike.

There are circumstances in a president's day-to-day life where the cabinet might not be present, or not enough of them for a quorum to remove him. When traveling, or when they've fucked off to perform their other duties than presidential hand-holding (think "Dubya reading children's books to kids while the skyscrapers were being 747ed"). If things got spicy quickly in one of those scenarios, there wouldn't be anyone who could really stop him.

Trump may be some sort of jackoff, but I've never gotten the impression he wants to end the world... even if he somehow got it in his head that nuking China or India or whoever would be a good idea, he's probably the sort that could be talked out of it in a hurry. Especially if they reminded him he'd be allowed to do it later if he still wanted.

 

[Lord of the Large Pants]

With all the shit going down right now in Ukraine, what's the current doomsday clock?

I'm asking here because I don't want to ask in the Happenings threads. I do not give a single fuck about Slav-on-Slav violence. Only not dying in an atomic holocaust.

 

[John Badman]

Limited nuclear war is nothing. Nothing ever happens.

 

[Jewthulhu]

With all the shit going down right now in Ukraine, what's the current doomsday clock?

I'm asking here because I don't want to ask in the Happenings threads. I do not give a single fuck about Slav-on-Slav violence. Only not dying in an atomic holocaust.

About the same as it has been. Deterrence is still in effect, and there's no existential threat to the Russian state (or Putin regime) that necessitates a suicidal nuclear exchange with the west.

 

[Mikoyan]

With all the shit going down right now in Ukraine, what's the current doomsday clock?

I'm asking here because I don't want to ask in the Happenings threads. I do not give a single fuck about Slav-on-Slav violence. Only not dying in an atomic holocaust.

'90 seconds to midnight' but that is completely useless because they now consider it a composite with nuclear and 'climate' threats, and in the latest announcement they've added in AI.

 

[Seething Troon Collector]

'90 seconds to midnight' but that is completely useless because they now consider it a composite with nuclear and 'climate' threats, and in the latest announcement they've added in AI.

It's unfortunate that the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists as an organization was corrupted by politics. Do you think Xi gives a singular fuck about global warming? It's a stupid system to place the burden of 'green transition' on countries that actually do shit and ignore the rest of the planet.

And nuclear war is more important than global warming. Although I guess you could say that the best solution to global warming is nuclear winter if you wanted to be dark about it.

 

[Jewthulhu]

Although I guess you could say that the best solution to global warming is nuclear winter if you wanted to be dark about it.

Nuclear winter is a controversial idea. Its mainly been proposed and pushed by anti-nuclear activists, while the exact science on it is less than clear.

 

[BirdUp]

Nuclear winter is a controversial idea. Its mainly been proposed and pushed by anti-nuclear activists, while the exact science on it is less than clear.

The nuclear explosions in a large-scale exchange would kick up enough dust and produce enough smoke and soot to block out the Sun, and the nitrogen oxides produced might deplete the ozone layer, resulting in semidarkness for a few weeks and lower temperatures. The latter is much more concerning.

 

[indomitable snowman]

Any geiger counter recommendations?

 

[John_Smith]

Anyone read Clausewitz, "On War"? There is a *sequel*, "On Thermonuclear War" by Herman Kahn. I'm surprised it has not been cited yet. It's not light reading, but I found it worthwhile even though it was first published in 1960.

 

[High Level Rad Waste]

Any geiger counter recommendations?

Get something out of the Ludlum Model 9 family if you can, L-9-3's are the most common to date. It's an ion chamber, so it doesn't actually operate in the GM region, but it does range from 1 mR to 50 R and has a beta sliding window for detecting hot particles. They're built like fucking tanks. Battery will last for a solid week of continuous operation and a couple months if you're using it conservatively.

If you're looking for one to avoid, the entire radeye line is a fucking meme. They're piss easy to break, batteries last all of 20 hours, and they require proprietary hardware and software to calibrate. The only exception being their version of remballs, but you're realistically never going to need a neutron detector.

 

[indomitable snowman]

Ludlum Model 9

Dang, used one looks to be $650 and new is $1200+.

 

[Jewthulhu]

Anyone read Clausewitz, "On War"? There is a *sequel*, "On Thermonuclear War" by Herman Kahn. I'm surprised it has not been cited yet.

I love Herman Kahn's work. I'd highly recommend checking out his book "On Escalation" if you haven't already.
I'd also recommend checking out works from Bernard Brodie and Thomas Schelling, and some of the RAND reports from James R Schlesinger. Henry Kissinger also wrote a book on nuclear strategy in the 50s (if you can stand the guy).

even though it was first published in 1960.

The 50s-60s was the "golden age" for nuclear strategy, in part because the field was so new. The field also pretty much stagnated, especially since the 80s. You get a paper here or there, a few good historians, and a few calls for revival, but nothing as groundbreaking anymore.