Putin puts Russia’s nuclear deterrent forces on alert | Hacker News Reader

Putin puts Russia’s nuclear deterrent forces on alert

apnews.com

105 pointszx85wes94 comments

These weapons need to be ready to retaliate with few minutes of advance in case of a first strike and Russia is engaging in an active war directly on it's border. Additionally, they are fully aware they are provoking nuclear powers right now and Bombers have been patrolling in neighboring countries since the war started. If they haven't been in alert until now, I don't know what Russia is doing.

Obviously I'm not an expert, but this looks like a symbolic gesture at best.

Or an offensive gesture.

It's definitely a symbolic gesture, but it's not a reaction to any threat of a first strike nuclear assault by NATO. The symbolic meaning is "I'm the craziest guy in the room, don't fuck with me".

Everyone was already fully aware of that.

I read this as Russia's nuclear forces going on the next highest level of alert.

They've gone from level zero preparedness to level one. What else can be expected here?

I appreciate that any threat of nuclear war is disturbing, but I don't read this as reason to head for the bunker. It isn't nuclear brinksmanship as much as an order for nuclear forces to be slightly more ready than the baseline.

If you are concerned, do the prudent thing and stock up on non-perishables. Have barterable commodities on hand. These are reasonable and non-hysterical actions which are appropriate in all situations. Taking proactive measures will reduce doomscroll induced anxiety.

Time to ask HN: how do you want to spend the last days of your life?

At home, with my wife and kid.

In a pub with family. Somewhere in southern South-America.

same way ive been living.

>Time to ask HN: how do you want to spend the last days of your life?

Plan is to paint my hallway and staircase today. Family is coming over.

Lighten up, Francis.

Right here, debating with y’all the merits of tabs versus spaces.

I love you

Some tips from the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy:

  “I thought,” he said, “that if the world was going to end we were meant to lie down or put a paper bag over our head or something.”

  “If you like, yes,” said Ford.

  “Will that help?” asked the barman.

  “No,” said Ford and gave him a friendly smile.

You might find inspiration in 2012 movie Seeking a Friend for the End of the World. It does not have especially high rating but I liked it. I keep thinking about it today for some reason. Even if the world does not end, finding a friend is always a good thing.

[1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1307068/

Personally, I would spend my last days in deep meditation until the very end.

Friends are not big help in this scenario…

Actually, I just remembered even better movie to recommend, if you are not deterred by a black and white foreign movie with subtitles - The White Disease [1] - a movie from 1937 where a hardened dictator, the leader of a big well armed country is preparing to attack a small country during the pandemic of a new disease. The movie is on YouTube for free and I think it is a little known gem for movie connoisseurs.

[1] https://youtu.be/HJMUIBEzYnI

Apparently it was a reaction to some stuff Liz Truss, UK Foreign Secretary, said on TV. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60558048 It sounds like a bit of a misunderstanding.

Putin is full of hot air.

I believe with how this is going, one of his advisors or generals will kill him before allowing him to actually fire nukes and initiate MAD.

These people might be ok letting him play war in the Ukraine but inviting annihilation from the rest of the world? I'm not so sure.

But then again, it doesn't seem like there's a lot of rational behavior coming out of Putin's Russia.

This is more serious than you think. Putin thought that, by now, he'll be already controlling the capital and setting a new puppet government. He is clearly losing the war (he was looking for quick toppling of the government).

Putin is in a very bad situation right now. And having his nuclear "deterrents" in high-readiness doesn't help.

Minutes ago the BBC confirmed both Ukraine and Russia will have negotiations, without pre-conditions in the Belarus border. This means:

- Its either a trap from Russia signals intelligence to be able to track Zelenskyy location. Hopefully he will not be there himself and is being well advised on that aspect by local foreign military experts. I love his Twitter posts, but I am sure all Russian military satellites are collecting signals intelligence and they can pick up their phones.

- Russia is really in a difficult spot militarily, knows about the advanced weapons coming in. Sadly that means the situation becomes more dangerous. I wish all the best to Ukraine but the sad true is the better things go for them the more dangerous it becomes for the world.

I have been tracking also lot's of US Black Hawks helicopters close to the Ukrainian border. The potential for an accident is high.

Slava Ukraini!

Unfortunately it looks, and I so much, so much, hope I am wrong, that the reasons for these negotiations, is so that Russia can transmit an Ultimatum.

I have reliable information that Belarus troops are being prepared to join Russian troops at the request of military support of their Russian fellows.

The US had "reliable information" that Iraq had WMD's. Try to be better than that.

The US never had reliable information just pretended so. Ukraine just complained there are missiles being launched from Belarus territory. Asked if this how they are preparing for the negotiations.

It's interesting that Belarus dictator said he would personally guarantee all airplanes based in his country would be grounded until the delegation would return to Ukraine. But did NOT say he would give the same guarantee for air assets based in Russia...

sorry to ruin your hope but it’s unlikely Russia will accept defeat here. they will go in with all they have. nothing to lose anymore.

Not only that. European countries are keen on giving Kiyv more weapons [0], which is what Putin has been warning against.

[0] https://twitter.com/Bundeskanzler/status/1497632817450266632

But somewhere you'll have to draw the line when dealing with a dictator on nukes or he won't stop using that card ever.

In the past we took such warnings seriously. I think that was wise.

In the past we saw how decades of nuclear tension passed by without a single bomb dropping.

I don't think anyone has a real appetite for nuclear war.

Playing the game of chicken enough times will lead to a bad outcome.

What's the alternative? Let the nuclear power that is the most mad do whatever they want?

I fear that anyone inside Russia, that could be in a position to topple him has been silenced long ago. At this point, he is trenched in like Stalin.

Every puppet has his or her limit though.

The failures in logistics in the current escapade show he has surrounded himself by yes men IMO

Yes men might as well be referred to as survival men.

I'm afraid anybody with the integrity to do something like that has been removed from power a long time ago already. Putin is surrounded by scared yes men, and he's always said there are strategic uses for nuclear weapons, not just a last line of defense by MAD.

Playing armchair general here, but I wonder what's the playbook if Russia decides to conduct a nuclear weapon "experiment".

Launching a missile to explode over the ocean to show resolve to use nukes. Next, launching a missile to explode over some Alaskan waste, if the previous step doesn't induce NATO to start the negotiations. Something like that.

That would trigger an overwhelming response.

Nuclear weapons create huge EMP bursts which disrupt communications. One popular type of theoretical first strike is to detonate one or two missiles in the atmosphere to cause confusion, then follow up with the main salvos while peoples' main sensors and communications are blind.

_High-altitude_ explosions create EMP. And nuke yield can be dialed down to Hiroshima levels.

In other words, a madman capable of using Nuclear weapons, will be gentle, sensitive and follow etiquette with his Nuclear actions?

You'd be amazed at how much etiquette there is on nuclear weapons use.

>Playing armchair general here, but I wonder what's the playbook if Russia decides to conduct a nuclear weapon "experiment".

Any launch regardless of trajectory will be considered act of war against the world. There will be no warning shots here.

That's not true.

There are more options available to US than just "fire all the missiles".

>There are more options available to US than just "fire all the missiles".

I mean any launch by Russia will be declaration of war on everyone.

I don't know the effectiveness of stopping these nukes with missile defense. I suspect the USA has multiple plans that they expect to be effective.

"I mean any launch by Russia will be declaration of war on everyone.'

Depends on the target. If its the Ukraine -- maybe not.

Like, if they launch on Ukraine. The nuke will go off on its target. Do you feel like the rest of the world who is anxiously watching what is happening will sit back and do nothing?

That is basically what they are doing now, sit back and do nothing.

Just some economics sanctions...

>That is basically what they are doing now, sit back and do nothing.

Ukraine never joined any military alliances. They never took the risk of needing to defend someone else, but in so doing meant they never got us to back them. That was their decision.

>Just some economics sanctions...

You don't end a war by adding to it. These sanctions will destroy the russian people. The russian people are innocent in all of this. If the Russian people do not rise up and overthrow their government. Then the sanctions were not inconveniencing enough for them to do that. Through their actions proving their collaboration.

If we can end this war by sanctions, crushing a nuclear power. The fear of global sanctions will be a message to every single person on Earth that war is no longer possible. We will evolve as the human species to be warless. This will be amazing.

The Russian people have a decision in front of them.

There's some game theory here I hope we don't get to test, but you could rationalize why the West wouldn't retaliate with more nuclear bombs despite MAD (or rather because of). For instance, not walking into a nuclear apocalypse.

What would you expect the world to realistically do?

If you respond with nukes its nuclear death for everyone.

If you respond with forces it's still prob going to be nuclear death for everyone.

So uh... Yeah?

Very unlikely that they could be intercepted. IIRC those missiles launched from Russia can reach the east coast in an hour.

> Any launch regardless of trajectory

It's doubtful that Americans would choose to turn their cities to glass because Putin launched a single rocket in a non-US trajectory. I just don't see that happening.

Doing nothing except further sanctions lol

Same here, armchair general, but I have to wonder what would happen if we parked a carrier strike group off Vladivostok. Russia is enormous and can't defend all its cities.

Sure, that'll calm things down. Why don't we just recognize it the Republic of West Alaska while we're at it.

Russia is committing suicide. And I hope it's not a physical suicide.

In any case, there's no coming back from this. My earlier prognosis of being trapped in a slavic North Korea technologically enslaved to China is starting to sound like an optimistic outcome.

Well, tomorrow we'll witness the economical suicide.

Sberbank - 1$ = 110,49₽

Tinkoff - 1$ = 153,75₽

And the markets are not even opened.

For the reference, before Putin started full-scale war against the Ukraine:

1$ = 78.66₽ (23rd Feb)

It's far from the first time rouble has plummeted. Just a reminder that 10 years ago, before this whole Crimea thing, 1$ was around 30₽. In the 90s and early 00s rouble was unstable enough that cellular carriers billed in dollars and many stores had prices in "у.е." that were also dollars just with a different name.

What do you mean when you say "Sberbank - 1$ = 110,49₽" and "Tinkoff - 1$ = 153,75₽"? Are these different exchange rates for different banks?

He means that the local currency is set to depreciate by half in a span of a week. And the bottom might be far far lower.

So these figures are from different times as well as different banks? If so then cool, that was the missing piece.

different banks? - Yes.

different times - No.

How extremely odd. Wonder why the values haven't converged? Do people inside the country not have access to this information? What's stopping someone from buying 150 rubles for a dollar and then buying $1.40ish for those same 150 rubles?

I should have perhaps mentioned in the original post:

1$ = 152,3₽ (buying 1 US dollar)

1$ = 85,7₽ (selling 1 US dollar).

Just because you pay 152₽ to buy 1$ doesn't mean you can sell it at the same price. At least banks won't buy it.

According to banki.ru the best price for selling US dollar now is 94,00₽.

Hope that clarifies it.

I see, the friction is in doing the reverse transaction. I guess you could find a buyer outside the traditional markets to complete the arbitrage transactions but that's going to be risky. Thanks for the clarification.

In times of such turmoil the spread between buy and sell price becomes so vast that it'll shield the exchangers from such schemes.

Yes. You can purchase dollars in exchange of Rubles.

Previous week it was aprox. 80 Rubles per U.S. Dollar.

Now due to the White House's statement that there will be sanctions against the Russia's central bank (they shouldn't able to use the reserves to keep Ruble stable) it is predicted that Ruble will collapse tomorrow.

It seems like too large a difference between banks, wouldn't this lead to arbitrage?

I believe currently only one of these banks can enable you to get your money out of Russia — thus the difference.

> slavic North Korea

Russian Federation is mostly not slavic. Secession of federation regions (as it happened with USSR) is the next step on the path of the least resistance.

You do realise that Russians are Slavs, correct?

There is an argument that stereotypical ethnic Russians are Finno-Ugric people.

Moreover, if you go almost anywhere in Siberia, 50% or more of the locals will be of ethnic minorities native to the area (you may describe their appearance as Asian). More in rural areas. Many regions are dual language, Russian + indigenous. This includes the largest administrative region on Earth that is not a country.

> ethnic stereotypical Russians are Finno-Ugric people

They speak Russian, a Slavic language. The culture is clearly linked and descended from the Old Slavonic people.

I'd love to know about the thinking as I'm scratching my head here. This is the first I've heard this claim and I am half Finnish, quarter Russian by ethnicity. My grandparents certainly did not think they were from the same ethnic group.

The first argument is theoretical and controversial. The second point is not.

What part of Russian being a Slavic language is controversial?

Poster is not saying that — they are answering the immediate parent’s question, not analyzing his arguments, and instead analyzing the two arguments of the grandparent post.

> They speak Russian, a Slavic language

Modern Russian is a little bit older than hundred years.

"Pre-reform" language was significantly different in script, vocabulary and grammar and wasn't older than hundred years itself. Before Napoleonic war 1812 nobility was speaking French, ruling family was German and serfs were speaking Polish, Belarusian, Ukrainian or one of the Turkic dialects.

The only slavic parts remaining in the modern Russian is Cyrillic script and words borrowed from Ukrainian.

Not exactly true. The Bible was translated into Russian in 1820 so we have a pretty good idea of what Russian language was like back then (99% similar to today’s language). There were a few minor changes to the script, but nothing crazy.

The phrase "Grattez le Russe, et vous verrez un Tartare" (Scratch a Russian and you'll find a Tatar) wasn't invented yesterday.

"Slavic Russians" are mostly Belarusians (Smolensk Region) or forcibly assimilated Ukrainians (Bryansk, Kursk, Voronezh) or not even assimilated Ukrainians in Kuban (they still speak Ukrainian, but have their own name for it).

They may be considered Slavs but the reality is many of them are more Mongolian and very different from Slavs. Even their language shows signs of Mongolian influence. The Mongolians could not pronounce certain sounds properly and the Russian language exhibits these pronunciations.

Russians are just one of dozens of nationalities in Russian Federation.

Before war started I was absolutely sure Putin is bluffing. But after listening to his TV speech, the realisation that he's delusional had creeped in, which was further strengthened when he did launch an attack.

Now, with this war going badly for Putin, with his soldiers not really willing to fight and Ukrainians resolved resistance, I am really worried he might order a launch. If someone would want the world buried with him in his tomb, it's him.

The days of mutually assured destruction is actually over. In the time needed for the ICBMs to reach targets on another continent is enough time to intercept those missiles. Obviously neighbours like Finland and Ukraine on the otherhand are problematic. I hope the best for them.

Many missile defense systems have been worked on, sattelites with high powered lasers, planes with high powered lasers, intercepting missiles like Israel's irondome, phalanx anti missile systems, and many others. No idea how effective but we shall see if we need them.

Canada is probably kicking itself pretty hardcore for not accepting the USA's offer to join missile defense. You can read how dumb we are here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Missile_Defence_in_Ca... lol or not.. Cold Lake Alberta is probably pretty quiet right now.

My city is tiny and probably not a target. If Toronto is hit, I'm jumping in my car and driving to help anyway I can. I recommend we all do the same, a pair of hands is enough to help.

Satellites with high powered lasers are a fantasy that don't exist right now.

The converted Boeing 747 airborne laser was a colossal failure and would have only been able to target a missile nearby in its boost/launch phase. It's now dismantled.

You think you can send fighters to gun down an icbm MIRV in its re-entry phase? Seriously?

>Satellites with high powered lasers are a fantasy that don't exist right now.

You need approximately a 5KW laser to do the job. Virtually all satellites have this much power available.

So this 'fantasy' is that you don't believe these sattelites are in orbit? It's quite obvious that this wouldn't be public knowledge. I admit I have no idea.

>The converted Boeing 747 airborne laser was a colossal failure and would have only been able to target a missile nearby in its boost/launch phase. It's now dismantled.

So to be clear, an ICBM flies at like mach 15-30. So it quickly leaves range of the 747. It was indeed scrapped, but was it? Did missile defence agency in around 2009 just decide they don't know what to do and havent done anything since?

They received 9 billion $ in 2021 and this sentence is literally all we know: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Futures_Com...

Is it simply top secret or did they utterly fail in their job?

>You think you can send fighters to gun down an icbm MIRV in its re-entry phase? Seriously?

If all you have is that, like canada, then that's what you have to do. It doesn't matter how probable the success is.

>You need approximately a 5KW laser to do the job. Virtually all satellites have this much power available.

"have this much power available" is one part. "having laser system to use that power" is another. If they couldn't get it to work with a laser mounted on top of a 747, what makes you think they can get it to work on a satellite?

I am not an expert, but lack of atmospheric losses could be a major factor in deploying a system with practical levels of coverage.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19790005436/downloads/19...

It seems like the most obvious point of interception is as the missiles are leaving the silo. In a heightened response wouldn't it be effective to maintain supersonic flight patterns within range of targets to deploy interceptors with the requisite time window?

highly unpopular opinion. NATO does have its share of blame for this escalation. they did it on purpose I would bet, to finally defeat Russia through a difficult war, without even losing 1 soldier. NATO was formed exactly for the purpose of countering the Soviet Union. Ukraine joining means rockets at small distance from Moscow. isn’t it reasonable to see it as an existential threat? it defeats the nuclear parity. US has invaded countries for much much less

NATO already has member countries equally close to Moscow, there was no way Ukraine was going to join any time soon, and no reason for NATO to station any missiles there when all of Russia has been in range of ICBMs fired from submarines since decades now. It's a completely made up story by Russia.

isn’t it the case that if the enemy launches ICBM you have more time to react than if they launch short rage rockets?

Ukraine had no intention or public support to join NATO before Russia invaded and annexed Crimea [0]. Russia's actions only have proven their intentions as aggressive justifying NATO's existence.

> it defeats the nuclear parity.

Ukraine gave up its nuclear armament in a peace treaty with the US and Russia. Russia is the one who violated this treaty.

> isn’t it reasonable to see it as an existential threat?

Only since Putin sees all former USSR as illegitimate states and as de facto part of the Russian empire. It has nothing to do with Russia's existence, but Putin's fantasies as what he sees as Russia. The entirety of this conflict follows Russian imperialism.

All attempts to be reasonable with Putin's Russia have been mistaken - the sanctions too weak - they have only proved to be appeasements and delaying the inevitable.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine–NATO_relations

Reply on news.ycombinator.com