welshbairn Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 10 minutes ago, renton said: The US historically made all the right noises on that front, particularly in the 80s when the Soviets introduced the SS-20 Saber missiles, highly mobile missiles with range restricted to Europe. The US counter deployed the Pershing missiles which was a huge step in guaranteeing how serious they were about the NATO shield. That is probably very different with trump in place now, right enough - but a wider point is that lower key conflicts only stay so through conventional force deterrence. Unless NATO conventional forces can stop Russia, then the tone of the conflict quickly accelerates to a nuclear one. Indeed it's hard to imagine a direct (rather than proxy) conflict between the west and Russia not dissolving into a nuclear one. Either one side or the other is quickly overwhelmed and in their panic, turn to the nuclear defence (and if they don't then the deterrence value of them is lost for all time) or a stalemate develops and one side or both turn to nukes to try and break that deadlock. Could be wrong about this, but I remember being told that at the time of the Cuban missile crisis the accuracy of the Soviet ICBMs was such that it was 50/50 whether they would hit the right hemisphere. Whatever, they protected Cuba for 50 odd years. I doubt either side would go nuclear over the Baltics if a conventional conflict between Nato and Russia kicks off there, as seems the most likely current danger zone. A retreat by one or the other or a perpetual ceasefire line would be much more likely and lots of negotiations in Geneva. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 3 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Could be wrong about this, but I remember being told that at the time of the Cuban missile crisis the accuracy of the Soviet ICBMs was such that it was 50/50 whether they would hit the right hemisphere. Whatever, they protected Cuba for 50 odd years. The first generation of ICBMs were not great but the second generation, coming in from 1960 onwards were much better. Remember also that in the early 60s the majority of both sides nuclear weapons were still freefall bombs delivered from manned bombers, not missiles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirkyblue2 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 How can we threaten Moscow if we don't know where the missile will end up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 4 minutes ago, kirkyblue2 said: How can we threaten Moscow if we don't know where the missile will end up? Shoosh you, they're not supposed to know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 33 minutes ago, welshbairn said: The more realistic value in my eyes is resistance to nuclear blackmail in lower key conflicts or negotiations. I've never thought that the US would voluntarily get into a full blown nuclear exchange with Russia over London or Paris getting nuked, I doubt the Russians do either, even less so with Trump in the Whitehouse. As long as Russia knows that we know the heavy price they would pay if they launched a nuclear attack, its leverage is pretty well off the table. Do they regularly start nuclear blackmailing countries outside of NATO who don't have nukes ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Of course, the provocative aspect of missiles in Cuba was that their proximity basically reduced US warning time to nothing. The idea being that you trade accuracy for time. Launch everything you've got in Cuba at Washington DC, giving the authorities there too little time to react and catching them before they can evacuate. Such a decapitating strike would render the US vulnerable to a secondary, larger bombardment from the Russian mainland with little prospect of mounting an effective counterstrike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 2 minutes ago, AUFC90 said: Do they regularly start nuclear blackmailing countries outside of NATO who don't have nukes ? They don't have to, it's not a secret. It was enough to stop Ukraine from getting any help and will probably be enough for Nato to back off sharpish if Russia get serious about Estonia etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 7 minutes ago, welshbairn said: They don't have to, it's not a secret. It was enough to stop Ukraine from getting any help and will probably be enough for Nato to back off sharpish if Russia get serious about Estonia etc. The answer is no then. There's hundreds of countries around the globe without and their not sitting in constant fear of nuclear attack/blackmail. Why aren't Japan getting blackmailed from the Chinese ? Or the various countries that surround Israel and fucking hate them ? No one is going to start firing nukes, it would start off a chain reaction which would obliterate us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 14 minutes ago, welshbairn said: They don't have to, it's not a secret. It was enough to stop Ukraine from getting any help and will probably be enough for Nato to back off sharpish if Russia get serious about Estonia etc. Ukraine = not in NATO Estonia = in NATO Bit of a difference there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Micheal Fallon telling everybody in parliament that he cant discuss the test only problem is the americans are telling everything on cnn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 59 minutes ago, doulikefish said: Micheal Fallon telling everybody in parliament that he cant discuss the test only problem is the americans are telling everything on cnn In the same 10 minutes he's saying the certification went perfectly and he can't comment on individual tests, the US say "aye it's fucked" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 2 hours ago, doulikefish said: Micheal Fallon telling everybody in parliament that he cant discuss the test only problem is the americans are telling everything on cnn "The missile did not veer off track, it was deliberately aimed at an oncoming meteorite that was about to hit Earth and obliterate all civilised life (and Greenock). We kept this information from the public as a matter of national security as we did not want to cause a widespread panic." #alternativefacts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/25/nuclear-submarine-collision-cold-war-cia-scotland?CMP=share_btn_tw Scottish cold war nuclear submarine collision kept secret for 43 years Reassuring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Those navy scamps and there bombs http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-38745034 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booker-T Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 On 7/5/2016 at 07:47, Mr Bairn said: Correct decision IMHO. Very interesting to see what happens if they're renewed and then Scotland goes independent. In 2014 the preferred option was for a deal to be struck to keep Faslane as an rUK naval base with Scotland getting something else in return. with the £ soon to become worthless (assuming trump quits / gets assasinated), how will the UK pay for this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 Ah Mr Bairn. Goodnight, sweet prince. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.