|
Post by kirinke on Mar 23, 2022 11:05:17 GMT
Unless of course he is totally mad. Like Nero fiddling while Rome burned mad.
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 23, 2022 14:13:00 GMT
Unless of course he is totally mad. Like Nero fiddling while Rome burned mad. Again, he can't do it alone. He doesn't have a red button like we do.
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on Mar 23, 2022 14:55:45 GMT
Again, he can't do it alone. He doesn't have a red button like we do. We don't have that either. The President has to issue orders and those orders have to be accepted before any nukes will be launched.
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Mar 23, 2022 17:39:51 GMT
Putin is already demanding "hostile" countries in the EU to pay Russia in rubles for gas. He is mad and getting desperate.
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 23, 2022 19:34:38 GMT
Again, he can't do it alone. He doesn't have a red button like we do. We don't have that either. The President has to issue orders and those orders have to be accepted before any nukes will be launched. My understanding is that Putin doesn't have the ability to order it solo like the President has. Yes, the people the President gives the order to can disobey them. Putin on the other hand has to get someone else to go along with him in order to give the orders that might be disobeyed.
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Mar 23, 2022 21:11:30 GMT
Anybody can be bribed or more likely in Putin's case threatened Maxperson. In this case, Putin can and does have the power to "disappear" someone if that person displeases him. Do you honestly think he'd have any trouble whatsoever to get somebody to "help" him given that fact?
At least with the US system, soldiers are more likely to disobey an order from the president if they feel it's illegal, because they're protected from reprisal. They won't get killed or worse for it. There's no such protection in Russia right under Putin.
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 23, 2022 22:32:25 GMT
Anybody can be bribed or more likely in Putin's case threatened Maxperson. In this case, Putin can and does have the power to "disappear" someone if that person displeases him. Do you honestly think he'd have any trouble whatsoever to get somebody to "help" him given that fact?
At least with the US system, soldiers are more likely to disobey an order from the president if they feel it's illegal, because they're protected from reprisal. They won't get killed or worse for it. There's no such protection in Russia right under Putin.
Really? You think someone is going to take, "Kill the world, including yourself or I will kill you?" If he tried to blow up the world, the man doesn't have the power to keep a bullet out of his head, which would be the result of his giving that order. He's one guy. He can only "disappear" people because he has other people who want to keep him in power so that they get power, influence and money. A threat to that makes Putin expendable to them and then he has no power to do anything but die.
|
|
|
Post by libtard on Mar 23, 2022 22:50:28 GMT
Putin is Верховный главнокомандующий Вооружёнными силами Российской Федерации
Which is to say, the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Forces. Under Articles 83 and 87 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation he has sweeping powers of policy determination, appointment, conscription, mobilization, enacting regulations regarding initiating wars or their cessation, and deployment of nuclear capability.
These powers were codified by Yeltsin in 1992.
Do not make the mistake of thinking that - with regard to these matters - the same political calculus applies in the Russian Federation as it does in the West. It does not.
A limited or tactical nuclear strike is entirely possible. E.g. Putin decides to hit Mariupol with a 1KT tacnuke - how does NATO respond?
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 24, 2022 0:12:28 GMT
Putin is Верховный главнокомандующий Вооружёнными силами Российской ФедерацииWhich is to say, the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Forces. Under Articles 83 and 87 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation he has sweeping powers of policy determination, appointment, conscription, mobilization, enacting regulations regarding initiating wars or their cessation, and deployment of nuclear capability. These powers were codified by Yeltsin in 1992. Do not make the mistake of thinking that - with regard to these matters - the same political calculus applies in the Russian Federation as it does in the West. It does not. A limited or tactical nuclear strike is entirely possible. E.g. Putin decides to hit Mariupol with a 1KT tacnuke - how does NATO respond? In other words, you've swallowed the media fear campaign hook, line and sinker.
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on Mar 24, 2022 2:58:12 GMT
My understanding is that Putin doesn't have the ability to order it solo like the President has. President doesn't have the authority to order it solo either. He requests a plan of action from the Joint Chiefs who lay out nuclear options (including "no options"), President reviews the option with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Secretary of Defense, the President chooses an option (theoretically including options not presented), then Secretary of Defense authenticates the order, then the order is transmitted to the NMCC and NORAD. Technically yes, the President can just order nukes be launched, however their are protocols in place to countermand those orders (basically a soft-military coup). Likewise, while the Sec of Def has no legal authority to stop the Presidents order, if they don't authenticate it, that would also stay a nuclear attack from the President of the US. The Russian President just has to activate the Cheget (Russia's version of our "nuclear football"), which transmits the orders to the Chief of the General Staff who actually has the launch codes, who then issues the order to launch. The Chief of the General Staff has the same role as our Sec of Def. It's rumored that the Minister of Defense also has a Cheget in the event that the President is incapacitated, but there is no confirmation of this. So Russia has the same level of 'safeguards' we do if a President were to "go crazy" and order a launch.
|
|
|
Post by libtard on Mar 24, 2022 5:18:55 GMT
My understanding is that Putin doesn't have the ability to order it solo like the President has. President doesn't have the authority to order it solo either. He requests a plan of action from the Joint Chiefs who lay out nuclear options (including "no options"), President reviews the option with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Secretary of Defense, the President chooses an option (theoretically including options not presented), then Secretary of Defense authenticates the order, then the order is transmitted to the NMCC and NORAD. Technically yes, the President can just order nukes be launched, however their are protocols in place to countermand those orders (basically a soft-military coup). Likewise, while the Sec of Def has no legal authority to stop the Presidents order, if they don't authenticate it, that would also stay a nuclear attack from the President of the US. The Russian President just has to activate the Cheget (Russia's version of our "nuclear football"), which transmits the orders to the Chief of the General Staff who actually has the launch codes, who then issues the order to launch. The Chief of the General Staff has the same role as our Sec of Def. It's rumored that the Minister of Defense also has a Cheget in the event that the President is incapacitated, but there is no confirmation of this. So Russia has the same level of 'safeguards' we do if a President were to "go crazy" and order a launch. For a preemptive or retaliatory strike with ICBMs, yes. But I don't think anyone is especially worried about a full strategic exchange. For an artillery-launched battlefield nuke, Putin can just order it.
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on Mar 24, 2022 7:15:51 GMT
For an artillery-launched battlefield nuke, Putin can just order it. The Russian military has protocols, same as we do. Yes, Russia has a bit more, 'radical' of a cultural mindset, but considering that the two times they almost lobbed nukes it was a Russian who said, "Wait, no, the order to nuke can't be right..."* I'm willing to consider that they'd stick to their protocols and those protocols do not allow for casual artillery nukes, even in wartime. * Granted it was also errors in the Russian nuclear detection and control systems that set those ready states... so... eh.
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Mar 24, 2022 11:33:00 GMT
Huh. Hopefully they stick to it.
The last thing we need is Putin going completely off the rails in that direction.
|
|
|
Post by cyphersmith on Mar 24, 2022 15:21:07 GMT
For an artillery-launched battlefield nuke, Putin can just order it. The Russian military has protocols, same as we do. Yes, Russia has a bit more, 'radical' of a cultural mindset, but considering that the two times they almost lobbed nukes it was a Russian who said, "Wait, no, the order to nuke can't be right..."* I'm willing to consider that they'd stick to their protocols and those protocols do not allow for casual artillery nukes, even in wartime. * Granted it was also errors in the Russian nuclear detection and control systems that set those ready states... so... eh. You missed one, I think. During the Cuban missile crisis, four submarines were in the Pacific near Cuba each armed with a nuclear torpedo with a 15 kiloton warhead. They hadn't received direct orders to fire, but on the submarine with the commander of the small flotilla the captain of that submarine and its political officer decided to fire their nuclear torpedo. Fortunately, on that submarine, and only that submarine, they also needed permission from the commander of the small flotilla. Who decided not to fire the torpedo. US ships on the surface had been dropping harmless (meaning practice) depth charges. They were running out of battery power and oxygen. On the day that they finally surfaced, the captain and political officer wanted to fire the torpedo. They wanted to do this because someone on the surface also threw live grenades into the water, which made them think that they might actually be at war. The flotilla commander disagreed. That's the only reason they didn't fire the torpedo.
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on Mar 24, 2022 19:35:58 GMT
Yeah, I couldn't remember how that had played out (if it was because of communication issues or over-zealous Captains) so I skipped mentioning it. The other two were fresher as I'd just reread accounts of them within the last five years. Basically, yes, if certain events occur (one of which is occurring*), the Russian military can use tactical nukes (ie, non-strategic, doesn't require the President to sign off on - because he's already signed off on it)... just like our military can. There's a reason the UN has never managed to make the use of tactical nukes illegal in war, and the US is the primary reason, we keep vetoing it. We're also the reason why the New-SALT treaty hasn't been ratified, first Trump and now Biden are trying to force Russia to strongarm China into signing it, and that's never gonna happen (Putin has openly admitted he has no swagger in that market, nor does he want to even try). So we can all look forward to 80's Rearmament 2: Nuclear Boogaloo playing out over the next couple of decades. * Resistance by a guerrilla civilian populace. Russian military doctrine allows for limited use of low-yield tactical nukes on civilian populations when that population houses guerrilla, nonuniformed resistance, or terror elements. Granted so can we, but each use has to be signed off on by the President, whereas with Russia, I think the President just has to mobilize nuclear forces to a war status. But I'm not sure as even our military experts aren't sure because so much of "top level" Russian military doctrine is sealed.
|
|