Ukraine Crisis

[sionascaig]

Some chat on the news by an expert saying the lack of speedy response could be down to "insubordination" in the army.

[Archery1969]

Michael Clark on Sky News said most of the Russian Troops deployed are conscripts with little training and equipment. When they engaged with Ukraine battle hardend forces they ran away, only to be shot at by their own forces, so they ran back to the Ukraine side and surrendered.

I suspect many of them will join Ukraine rather than go back to Russia in a prisoner swap to potentially face a firing squard for running away and not engaging with the enemy.

The question still remains as to where is the bulk of Russia's professional soldiers, dead or waiting for the call to engage ?

[Kai]

But I presume Putin would use Nukes but so would NATO.

Surprised to see nukes mentioned at every single page, they're not allowed to use them.

Nukes are only used as a deterrent, and if that fails they're next to useless.

[Derek27]

Michael Clark on Sky News said most of the Russian Troops deployed are conscripts with little training and equipment. When they engaged with Ukraine battle hardend forces they ran away, only to be shot at by their own forces, so they ran back to the Ukraine side and surrendered.

I suspect many of them will join Ukraine rather than go back to Russia in a prisoner swap to potentially face a firing squard for running away and not engaging with the enemy.

The question still remains as to where is the bulk of Russia's professional soldiers, dead or waiting for the call to engage ?

Sooner or later, Putin's gonna have to pull some elite troops out of Ukraine to deal with the issue. I don't think he has much in reserve that's not already on the battlefield. That's exactly what Ukraine want, but so far he's reluctant to do it. In the meantime, Ukraine advances against inexperienced conscripts.

[Archery1969]

But I presume Putin would use Nukes but so would NATO.

Surprised to see nukes mentioned at every single page, they're not allowed to use them.

Nukes are only used as a deterrent, and if that fails they're next to useless.

According to a Russian military doctrine stated in 2010, nuclear weapons could be used by Russia "in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it or its allies, and also in case of aggression against Russia with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is threatened".[47][48][49] Most military analysts believe that, in this case, Russia would pursue an 'escalate to de-escalate' strategy, initiating limited nuclear exchange to bring adversaries to the negotiating table. Russia will also threaten nuclear conflict to discourage initial escalation of any major conventional conflict.[50]

[sionascaig]

I'm just hacked off that the Royals are getting priority in event of nuclear attack versus say, a doctor or a nurse....

There will not be much demand for experts in family photo opportunities after the fact.

Need to rethink that policy pronto!

[Archery1969]

I'm just hacked off that the Royals are getting priority in event of nuclear attack versus say, a doctor or a nurse....

There will not be much demand for experts in family photo opportunities after the fact.

Need to rethink that policy pronto!

Certain people will be protected. I imagine the list is a closely guarded secret that you would not get access to even under the freedom of information act.

From what I was told back in the 1990s:

- Immeadiate members of the Royal Family
- The PM
- Members of the cabinet
- Leader of the opposition
- Between 8,000 and 12,000 members of the armed forces, including medical staff

Also, a number of water, gas and electricity companies have a Nuclear Bunker which were built back in the late 1980s, how good they would be against modern Nuclear Weapons is unclear. I went to the one at Southern Water as my brother in-law was a manager there. Was interesting to have a look around but rather spooky.

Its believed there is a modern Nuclear Bunker somewhere in Cheshire. There are many old ones which are now museums and have had the blast doors all removed. If the one in Cheshire is true then it wouldn't be for the general public.

I been to one of the ones in Finland, very impressive. Each one has a medical centre, accomadation, water treament centre, armoury, food storage, bathrooms, detoxification centre, able to facilitate 1,200 people for upto 18 months. They have enough of them to protect 88% of the population assuming they can all get to one in time. In comparison the UK has none for public use.

[Archery1969]

Warwick University did a detailed paper in June 2022 on the UK suffering a Nuclear Strike. Its conclusion was that the UK is now less ready than it was in 1980 and 1960. The advice back then was to 1. Get inside. 2. Stay inside 3. Stay tuned. That advice has never been updated.

Broadly speaking there are three zones of damage radiating out from the epi-centre of a nuclear strike:

Zone 1 - Fireball, shock wave and radiation. This zone is where people are annihilated by the initial blast.
Zone 2 - Severe burns and injuries caused by the shockwave and flying debris.
Zone 3 - People are affected by radiation sickness in the shorter term and cancers (especially thyroid) and foetal abnormalities over a longer time-scale.

Assuming at 10KT warhead is used then Zone 1 = 1 mile squared, Zone 2 = 2 miles squared and Zone 3 = 3 miles squared. if a 100KT warhead is used then these figures can safely be multiplied to 10 miles, 20 miles and 30 miles squared.

One must also assume that law and order will break down, roads will become clogged as survivors and those not directly affected flee and there will be widespread looting and personal violence.

While Russia has over 5,000 nuclear warheads its unclear how many are actually operational. Also, because of the number of targets they would need to hit against NATO countries then its safe to assume they would probably only target Military infrastructure in each one. Based on this assumption, if you live greater than 30 miles from the nearest Army, Naval and Airforce base then your survival rate increases to >= 70%.

[ForFolksSake]

Warwick University did a detailed paper in June 2022 on the UK suffering a Nuclear Strike. Its conclusion was that the UK is now less ready than it was in 1980 and 1960. The advice back then was to 1. Get inside. 2. Stay inside 3. Stay tuned. That advice has never been updated.

Broadly speaking there are three zones of damage radiating out from the epi-centre of a nuclear strike:

Zone 1 - Fireball, shock wave and radiation. This zone is where people are annihilated by the initial blast.
Zone 2 - Severe burns and injuries caused by the shockwave and flying debris.
Zone 3 - People are affected by radiation sickness in the shorter term and cancers (especially thyroid) and foetal abnormalities over a longer time-scale.

Assuming at 10KT warhead is used then Zone 1 = 1 mile squared, Zone 2 = 2 miles squared and Zone 3 = 3 miles squared. if a 100KT warhead is used then these figures can safely be multiplied to 10 miles, 20 miles and 30 miles squared.

One must also assume that law and order will break down, roads will become clogged as survivors and those not directly affected flee and there will be widespread looting and personal violence.

While Russia has over 5,000 nuclear warheads its unclear how many are actually operational. Also, because of the number of targets they would need to hit against NATO countries then its safe to assume they would probably only target Military infrastructure in each one. Based on this assumption, if you live greater than 30 miles from the nearest Army, Naval and Airforce base then your survival rate increases to >= 70%.

I didn't realise they were still around

https://cnduk.org/

[Archery1969]

Warwick University did a detailed paper in June 2022 on the UK suffering a Nuclear Strike. Its conclusion was that the UK is now less ready than it was in 1980 and 1960. The advice back then was to 1. Get inside. 2. Stay inside 3. Stay tuned. That advice has never been updated.

Broadly speaking there are three zones of damage radiating out from the epi-centre of a nuclear strike:

Zone 1 - Fireball, shock wave and radiation. This zone is where people are annihilated by the initial blast.
Zone 2 - Severe burns and injuries caused by the shockwave and flying debris.
Zone 3 - People are affected by radiation sickness in the shorter term and cancers (especially thyroid) and foetal abnormalities over a longer time-scale.

Assuming at 10KT warhead is used then Zone 1 = 1 mile squared, Zone 2 = 2 miles squared and Zone 3 = 3 miles squared. if a 100KT warhead is used then these figures can safely be multiplied to 10 miles, 20 miles and 30 miles squared.

One must also assume that law and order will break down, roads will become clogged as survivors and those not directly affected flee and there will be widespread looting and personal violence.

While Russia has over 5,000 nuclear warheads its unclear how many are actually operational. Also, because of the number of targets they would need to hit against NATO countries then its safe to assume they would probably only target Military infrastructure in each one. Based on this assumption, if you live greater than 30 miles from the nearest Army, Naval and Airforce base then your survival rate increases to >= 70%.

I didn't realise they were still around

https://cnduk.org/

Christ, not those muppets.

£200 billion is not much to spend on a deterrent. Besides Labour has a mega money tree/train.

[Archery1969]

It would seem the UK is not a sovereign nation. Still dancing to the tune of the USA…

Sky news:

US blocks UK from green lighting Storm Shadow missile attacks on Russia. Sir Keir is ready to let Ukraine use them inside Russia but Joe Doe is not.

[ForFolksSake]

It would seem the UK is not a sovereign nation. Still dancing to the tune of the USA…

Sky news:

US blocks UK from green lighting Storm Shadow missile attacks on Russia. Sir Keir is ready to let Ukraine use them inside Russia but Joe Doe is not.

53rd State

[Derek27]

Ukraine have blown up another bridge.

[Archery1969]

Ukraine have blown up another bridge.

My question would be, if these 1200 troops keep ploughing forward into Russia, sooner or later they will get isolated, surrounded and probably annihilated. What’s the exit plan or are they doing “Let’s do a Wagner and go all the way to the Kremlin” ?

[Derek27]

Ukraine have blown up another bridge.

My question would be, if these 1200 troops keep ploughing forward into Russia, sooner or later they will get isolated, surrounded and probably annihilated. What’s the exit plan or are they doing “Let’s do a Wagner and go all the way to the Kremlin” ?

They are largely facing inexperienced conscripts who surrender and Ukraine have elite units in there. I think the plan is to force Russia to remove some of their best units from Ukraine.

Also, Putin may control the media but he can't control the mouths of 100,000+ people being evacuated from their homes and can see Russia are getting annihilated. Massive morale boost for Ukraine and body blow for Putin.