News Related To The Ukraine / Russian War

Shiftless2 said:
That is BS.



That does not say that Russia would take back their armaments - only that Russia would be given them.
Click to expand...

That does not mean the nukes were "given" to them, but simply recognized the reality that they were and aways are Russian property.
So Russia removing them from the Ukraine was a gift to both the US and the Ukraine.
It reduced Russia's retaliatory response capability, so was a sacrifice by Russia.
So it was the Ukraine and the US who owed Russia for this act of kindness.
And instead, what the US and Ukraine did was try to prevent Russian use of Sevastopol, murder 30k ethnic Russian Ukrainian natives, try to put NATO nukes on Russia's border, and cut off all communications with Moscow.
 
Rigby5 said:
"The fact these Russian nuclear devices were IN the Ukraine, does not mean that the Ukraine made, owned, controlled, or had launch codes for them ever.
They were always built by, owned, controlled, and removed by Russia." R5 #276
"That does not mean the nukes were "given" to them, but simply recognized the reality that they were and aways are Russian property." R5 #281
Click to expand...
Even if true it's immaterial, and there appears to be substantial factual error in these assertions.

Your assertion is they were "Russian".
The global Cold War consensus was they were "Soviet" missiles, and that Ukraine had been subject to Soviet totalitarian rule.

UNQUESTIONABLY some within Ukraine might have wanted Soviet membership at that time.
Likely some, perhaps most within Ukraine did not.

During the GHWB administration when "The Wall" fell, and the Cold War ended, those former Soviet missiles were in the CUSTODY of Ukraine.
Your oft' repeated assertions about ownership, control, & launch codes may or may not be true. For sake of decisive refutation we can assume them true.

Even if true, so what?
Ukraine had CUSTODY *, and while Ukraine on that very day using those former Soviet missiles in war to attack enemies outside Ukraine borders would have been difficult without the launch code you mentioned,
that is hardly an insurmountable technical problem.

There are numerous ways Ukraine could have solved that problem.
- Ukraine could have deciphered the codes.
- Ukraine could have bought the codes, from a hacker, or a former Soviet official, or someone else.
- The entire launch code interlock could have simply been bypassed with a vodka-swilling drunk with a solder gun.

BOTTOM LINE:
a) Ukraine had CUSTODY
b) Ukraine reportedly forfeited custody for international assurances, which if reports are true, have since been flagrantly violated.

* Think it through.
You think the Kremlin could have sent Russian commandos to repatriate former Soviet missiles from Ukraine to Russia?
Not likely.
And the risk of any such attempt resulting in nuking Moscow would be a substantial deterrent to even attempting it, let alone succeeding at it.
 
sear said:
Even if true it's immaterial, and there appears to be substantial factual error in these assertions.

Your assertion is they were "Russian".
The global Cold War consensus was they were "Soviet" missiles, and that Ukraine had been subject to Soviet totalitarian rule.

UNQUESTIONABLY some within Ukraine might have wanted Soviet membership at that time.
Likely some, perhaps most within Ukraine did not.

During the GHWB administration when "The Wall" fell, and the Cold War ended, those former Soviet missiles were in the CUSTODY of Ukraine.
Your oft' repeated assertions about ownership, control, & launch codes may or may not be true. For sake of decisive refutation we can assume them true.

Even if true, so what?
Ukraine had CUSTODY *, and while Ukraine on that very day using those former Soviet missiles in war to attack enemies outside Ukraine borders would have been difficult without the launch code you mentioned,
that is hardly an insurmountable technical problem.

There are numerous ways Ukraine could have solved that problem.
- Ukraine could have deciphered the codes.
- Ukraine could have bought the codes, from a hacker, or a former Soviet official, or someone else.
- The entire launch code interlock could have simply been bypassed with a vodka-swilling drunk with a solder gun.

BOTTOM LINE:
a) Ukraine had CUSTODY
b) Ukraine reportedly forfeited custody for international assurances, which if reports are true, have since been flagrantly violated.

* Think it through.
You think the Kremlin could have sent Russian commandos to repatriate former Soviet missiles from Ukraine to Russia?
Not likely.
And the risk of any such attempt resulting in nuking Moscow would be a substantial deterrent to even attempting it, let alone succeeding at it.
Click to expand...

No, the Ukraine NEVER had "custody".
The USSR was always pretty much fake, and it was actually always Russia in charge.
And the guards, personnel, etc. at these missile sites in the Ukraine were always only Russian.

Launch codes can not just be deciphered, bypassed, or bought because they are data to the targeting algorithm, and the entire targeting algorithm has to be fully understood.

Think about it.
When the US puts missile silos in Montana, it is manned by the state of Montana?

The launch destinations of all missiles can not be fixed, since it could be Russia, China, Korea, India, or even aliens that need to be targeted.
So launch codes have to include the targeting destination of the launch, in a proprietary format.
 
Shiftless2 said:
It does not say that those nukes were Russian property.
Click to expand...

Obviously they were.
The Ukraine never wanted or had any say in the construction, installation, maintenance, or control of those nukes.
All they did was make the Ukraine targeted by US missiles.

Does Montana want nuke sites there?
Of course not.
They are there in Montana so that it would be harder for anyone to take out DC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top