• Womble@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    There are, the authors estimate, 150 Russian remote nuclear launch sites and 70 in China, approximately 2,500km (1,550 miles) from the nearest border, all of which could be reached by US air-launched JASSM and Tomahawk cruise missiles in a little more than two hours in an initial attack designed to prevent nuclear weapons being launched.

    Emphasis mine, I’m pretty sure even Russia can notice hundreds of cruise missiles are heading directly at their silos and figure out that this looks like an attack on their strategic nuclear arsenal in two whole hours, given that ICBMs take around a quarter of that from launch to impact.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, the West pushing the first strike and anti-second-strike envelope is a real problem, but that’s not a good example.

      • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        The whole idea of nuclear ICBM warfare and MAD is that you are prepared to launch at least some of your missiles before your attack capability can be removed. So, to maintain MAD capability, at least some of your missiles have to be launch capable at any time in order to effectively respond to a first strike. Of course, that readiness level can be increased if the perceived threat is higher. What that means is that a response strike needs to be able to launch in less than 30 minutes. Two hours is very generous. The first strike advantage is that you can launch most of your missiles. The MAD doctrine assures that all victories on this stage are pyrrhic.

  • Gsus4@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Yes, starting stupid wars and botching them in front of the whole world makes you vulnerable.

    • bigFab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Did invading France and Poland make nazis vulnerable? Ppl forget how close they got to totally annihilate Russia and win the WWII.

      • Gsus4@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        If I understand you correctly, read more history. the nazis invaded Poland together with the USSR on two fronts (as, you know, best buds), hard to botch that.

        When the nazis invaded France…it was the French who fucked up…the nazis didn’t.

        • bigFab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Ofc I know the Poland partition, but to call them best buds after what happened later? Stalin may have believed that, but for Hitler it was more a tactical gambit.

          I know the french should’ve tried to stop them in the border mountains, but still that’s not the point here. I understand we were discussing the international reaction to attacking a country.

          • Gsus4@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Best. Buds. Having a parade together in Brest, 1939. Getting betrayed is what you get for making deals with nazis. #leopardsatemyface

  • Carrolade@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against arms control agreements if they’re interested. Are they interested though?

    • Count042@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Remind me again who pulled out of arms control agreements first?

      The real question is if the US would be interested.

  • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Ill have to tell ya all. Im not real concerned on that front. IF china was a neighbor that india, japan, korea, and such was good with they could have a nice european union thing going.

  • vga@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    It would be amazing if all their ICBMs could be just wiped out, but I’m a bit skeptical whether that’s actually true. Even without considering all the submarines.