this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2024
127 points (97.0% liked)
Technology
59287 readers
5186 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Which leads me to ask: if he has to have a launch capacity in space, how badly broken is Russia's launch capacity?
They probably sent all their engineers to die in Ukraine.
His nuclear arsenal is primarily 50-year-old delivery systems that have been "maintained" by notorious black market scalpers. It would be a surprise if even one ICBM could make it to its destination and then detonate with effect, even if absolutely no countermeasures were deployed.
The world has been politely capitulating to a man they know is bluffing. It's been the lazy way out for decades now. It's time to call his bluff and end this regime of terror.
thats a hell of a risk to take though, and he knows no-one can take it
One of the things about New START is the US and Russia inspect each other's launch capacity, and its a bit of a zero sum game: The US would never admit it has better launch capacity against Russia because it tells China and Iran they can sweep in and gain soft power. The US could admit it and then the rest of the world sees a hyperpower situation again and a need to de-escalate its own capacity.
They wouldn't though, even if 5% of their missiles/nukes work, millions would die.