Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-25

[Berkut]

I think there is plenty going on, and yes, it is all classified, but that doesn't mean there isn't general awareness of the systems.

And I don't know what the point of disparaging the discussion by commens like "try hard" mode serves.

Even the process of launching our own weapons involves incredible amounts of pre-work. After all, we have to know what to launch them at, right?

That means lots of intelligence work. Lots of satellites being tasked to find  and track them. I am sure that isn't just an on and off effort, and almost certainly scales to the threat level. Hell, even putting satellites into orbit is something that likely scales based on threat levels. That entire effort to keep track and assign targets is a changing calculus, and the level of attention it gets surely changes based on the threat level. I imagine during the CW is was kept up to date daily, post CW, probably not quite as much. Now?

How many of our ballistic subs are at sea? Does that ever change based on threat assessment? I am sure it does.

How many of our attack subs are tasked with shadowing the dozen Russian missile boats? How many are out there looking for them? Does that scale based on threat level? I am sure it does.

Anyway, I don't really understand that argument. We of course do not really know any answers, but I don't think it is crazy to speculate about how the US nuclear warfighting capabilities have likely been re-evaluated in light of the first time in decades that there is a credible and actual threat of some near peer nuclear power making noises about nuclear annihilation.

And I suspect only a casual observer would look at what the US military went through during the Cuban Missile Crisis, note that ONE thing that happened was the number of bombers in the air went from 75 to 135, and conclude that not much changed between DEFCON 4 and DEFCON 2. I suspect that doubling the number of bombers in the air was the least of the preparations made at that time. How many bombers went from being 6 hours ready to launch to 30 minutes, for example? How many dispersed to their wartime bases? 

[Jacob]

Yeah that's a good point, Sheilbh... I only considered Kadyrov in the context of Ukraine. But maybe it's internal facing. If Putin's getting worried about the loyalty of his National Guard, having Kadyrovites ready to ensure loyalty might be appealing.

[Razgovory]

What exactly would Putin gain from using a nuke?

[Barrister]

What exactly would Putin gain from using a nuke?

Deter west from getting involved, maybe.

[Habbaku]

Putin using a nuke means most of the world becomes in favor of regime-change over night.

[Barrister]

Putin using a nuke means most of the world becomes in favor of regime-change over night.

I assume that the US is doing almost everything it can already to encourage regime change in Russia behind the scenes...

[Jacob]

What exactly would Putin gain from using a nuke?

Deter west from getting involved, maybe.

It's a bit of a gamble. He'll have to gamble that facing a "little nuke" the West goes "uh oh, sorry Vlad - you're intimidating us to back off" rather than "oh shit, fuck him up NOW!" Personally I support the second option.

Because if Vlad uses a "little nuke" and gets away with it, he'll do it again and we'll end up in the same spot anyhow.

[The Larch]

You guys read anything about the Abramovich and Ukranian negotiators possible poisoning?

[Barrister]

You guys read anything about the Abramovich and Ukranian negotiators possible poisoning?

Yet another Twitter-only story so far - was waiting for a published article before discussing.

Edit:

This apparently is the story (paywall):

https://www.wsj.com/articles/roman-abramovich-and-ukrainian-peace-negotiators-suffer-symptoms-of-suspected-poisoning-11648480493

[Habbaku]

Beeb's WSJ article:

Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich and Ukrainian peace negotiators suffered symptoms of suspected poisoning after a meeting in Kyiv earlier this month, people familiar with the matter said.

Mr. Abramovich and two senior members of the Ukrainian team developed symptoms following the March 3 meeting in Kyiv that included red eyes, constant and painful tearing, and peeling skin on their faces and hands, the people said. Mr. Abramovich has shuttled between Moscow, Belarus and other negotiating venues since Russia invaded Ukraine.

Mr. Abramovich was blinded for a few hours, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The people blamed the suspected attack on hard-liners in Moscow who they said wanted to sabotage talks to end the war. A person close to Mr. Abramovich said it wasn't clear who had targeted the group.

Mr. Abramovich and the Ukrainian negotiators, who include Ukrainian lawmaker Rustem Umerov, a Crimean Tatar, have since improved and their lives aren't in danger, the people said. Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelensky, who has met with Mr. Abramovich, wasn't affected, they said. Mr. Zelensky's spokesman said he had no information about any suspected poisoning.

Western experts who looked into the incident said it was hard to determine whether the symptoms were caused by a chemical or biological agent or by some sort of electromagnetic-radiation attack, the people familiar with the matter said.

The Kremlin didn't respond to a request for comment about the suspected poisoning.

The investigation was organized by Christo Grozev, an investigator with the Bellingcat open-source collective who concluded that a Kremlin team poisoned Russian opposition politician Alexei Navalny with a nerve agent in 2020. Mr. Grozev said he saw the images of the effects of the attack on Mr. Abramovich and Ukrainian negotiators. But he added that examinations of the affected individuals couldn't be arranged in the western Ukrainian city of Lviv, through which they were traveling, because these people were in a hurry to get to Istanbul.

Too much time had passed for the suspected poison to be detected by the time a German forensic team was able to perform an examination, he said. "It was not intended to kill, it was just a warning," Mr. Grozev said.

Bellingcat said the three men who are suspected to have been poisoned consumed only chocolate and water in the hours before the symptoms appeared. The men went to an apartment in Kyiv that night after the talks concluded and began to feel ill, according to Bellingcat. The next day the group drove from Kyiv to Lviv, on their way to Poland and then Istanbul.

The Russian government previously has been accused of using poison to punish enemies. In 2004 Ukrainian politician Viktor Yushchenko was poisoned, leaving his face disfigured. Mr. Yushchenko blamed the attack on Russia.

In 2018, Britain blamed Russia's intelligence services for a nerve-agent attack on Sergei Skripal, a former Russian military officer who defected to the U.K., and his daughter Yulia. Both survived, as did a British police officer hospitalized after contact with the poison. A British woman later died after accidentally coming into contact with the nerve agent.

The Kremlin has denied any involvement in the Skripal poisoning.

Mr. Abramovich, who has longstanding links to President Vladimir Putin, became involved in attempts to end the war in Ukraine shortly after Moscow launched the invasion on Feb. 24, people familiar with the matter said.

His efforts are sometimes in conjunction with and sometimes parallel to a separate, official, negotiating track between Ukrainian and Russian representatives, they said. The Kyiv meeting where the suspected poisoning took place involved Mr. Abramovich, who is one of Russia's wealthiest men, and members of the official Ukrainian negotiating team.

Mr. Zelensky has asked President Biden not to impose sanctions on Mr. Abramovich, who owns a minority stake in the steel company Evraz PLC and has Portuguese citizenship, because he is involved in the negotiations, according to people familiar with the call. Mr. Abramovich, who also owns the Chelsea soccer club, has been sanctioned by the U.K. and the European Union.

Asked about Mr. Abramovich in an interview with independent Russian media organizations on Sunday, Mr. Zelensky said he wouldn't comment on his discussions with Mr. Biden. He said Mr. Abramovich was initially a member of a subcommittee of the Russian negotiating team, and then tried to help with humanitarian matters, particularly the evacuation of Ukrainian civilians from the besieged city of Mariupol.

Mr. Abramovich was seen in Belarus in late February as initial, official talks began between Kyiv and Moscow and has acted as a back channel for talks with the Kremlin, personally meeting with Mr. Putin on Ukraine, people familiar with the matter say. His role in the talks varies regularly and he has tried to engage others, including former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, those people said.

Despite the suspected poisoning, Mr. Abramovich has decided to remain involved in the peace talks, a person close to him said. In the past week he has traveled to Poland and Ukraine and traveled Monday to Istanbul, this person said. People who have seen him recently say he has dedicated a lot of time to mediating between the warring parties. Mr. Abramovich's late mother was from Ukraine.

The talks have failed to gain much traction, as the war has ground to a stalemate. Russia's offensive has stalled on a number of fronts. And Ukraine, meanwhile, has lacked the resources to mount a significant counterattack to regain occupied territory.

A new round of negotiations is set for Tuesday in Turkey, as negotiators discuss both a potential political settlement to the war and immediate humanitarian issues, such as the evacuation of civilians from cities under bombardment and prisoner exchanges.

Mr. Zelensky has indicated that Ukraine is open to compromise, saying it would be willing to maintain a neutral status if it receives binding security guarantees from both the West and Moscow. He has ruled out Moscow's demand to discuss demilitarization of the country. Any agreement with Russia would have to be endorsed by a popular referendum held after all Russian forces withdraw to the positions they held before Feb. 24, he told Russian media on Sunday.

While the Kremlin says it is interested in pursuing a negotiated solution, presenters on popular talk shows on Russian state TV have said in recent days that any agreement with Mr. Zelensky would be a humiliation for Russia and said that Ukraine should be absorbed into the Russian state.

[Berkut]

What exactly would Putin gain from using a nuke?

In a sane, rational world?

Nothing at all.

In crazy paranoid dictator Putin world?

Revenge? Satisfaction? Desperate attempt to win an unwinnable war?

Who fucking knows?

[Habbaku]

And a shitty PDF.

[crazy canuck]

"A U.S. official said on Monday that intelligence suggests the sickening of Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich and Ukrainian peace negotiators was due to an environmental factor, not poisoning."

From the Globe

[Josquius]

"A U.S. official said on Monday that intelligence suggests the sickening of Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich and Ukrainian peace negotiators was due to an environmental factor, not poisoning."

From the Globe

Can't help but find it kind of sus and suspect roman wanting to spin himself as the good oligarch as is his wont.

Of course of the Ukrainians agree...

[OttoVonBismarck]

I think there is plenty going on, and yes, it is all classified, but that doesn't mean there isn't general awareness of the systems.

And I don't know what the point of disparaging the discussion by commens like "try hard" mode serves.

Even the process of launching our own weapons involves incredible amounts of pre-work. After all, we have to know what to launch them at, right?

That means lots of intelligence work. Lots of satellites being tasked to find  and track them. I am sure that isn't just an on and off effort, and almost certainly scales to the threat level. Hell, even putting satellites into orbit is something that likely scales based on threat levels. That entire effort to keep track and assign targets is a changing calculus, and the level of attention it gets surely changes based on the threat level. I imagine during the CW is was kept up to date daily, post CW, probably not quite as much. Now?

How many of our ballistic subs are at sea? Does that ever change based on threat assessment? I am sure it does.

How many of our attack subs are tasked with shadowing the dozen Russian missile boats? How many are out there looking for them? Does that scale based on threat level? I am sure it does.

Anyway, I don't really understand that argument. We of course do not really know any answers, but I don't think it is crazy to speculate about how the US nuclear warfighting capabilities have likely been re-evaluated in light of the first time in decades that there is a credible and actual threat of some near peer nuclear power making noises about nuclear annihilation.

And I suspect only a casual observer would look at what the US military went through during the Cuban Missile Crisis, note that ONE thing that happened was the number of bombers in the air went from 75 to 135, and conclude that not much changed between DEFCON 4 and DEFCON 2. I suspect that doubling the number of bombers in the air was the least of the preparations made at that time. How many bombers went from being 6 hours ready to launch to 30 minutes, for example? How many dispersed to their wartime bases?

No, I don't think we are doing more satellite launches over this, the schedule of even classified military launches is pretty well known since you can't launch them secretly (the payloads are classified, but there are people who watch this stuff for fun, we know when classified payloads go up.) Nothing we publicly know about our submarine fleet comports with your speculation--instead what we publicly know is the submarine fleet is not a homebody fleet, as many of them as can be operationally supported are at sea at all times, the only reason we have a certain % that are always at home is because they have to be rotated on/off duty for required maintenance, resupplies, crew changes etc. That all is just operational stuff that has to occur, but other than that we generally don't have subs ready for duty that we keep in port at least as far as we're told publicly. All of the targeting is already done for our nuclear weapons, that much is also publicly known. There's not really much on the fly targeting work that has to be performed.

I don't know why you characterized my "try harder" comment the inflammatory way that you did, but that is what some of your post amounted to, a belief that tracking nuclear threats is a process for which we have a "try harder" button, which doesn't appear to be how our nuclear tracking/defense system was built. Our nuclear launch system does have levels of readiness, but I've never seen it publicly mentioned our nuclear tracking/defense systems do. I would honestly hope that they do not, because I don't really know with a $750bn military what the argument is for having periods where we "aren't doing everything we can to monitor for, detect, and track potential nuclear strikes by Russia." I'd question what we're spending money on if that's the case. The scaling up/down of nuclear launch readiness makes more sense--the closer you are to a hairtrigger on the nuclear arsenal the more potential there is for accidents, that same concern doesn't really exist with detection/defense.