[jostmey]

I have been gravely concerned that Putin would order a nuclear strike in Ukraine or elsewhere. Now, I believe the chances of that happening have actually gone down substantially. Why? Because Putin doesn’t want to risk ordering a nuclear strike to find out these deterrents, which haven’t been tested in decades, no longer operate (or never actually did operate). Then Russia would be completely vulnerable. Instead, I believe Putin could order nuclear testing to start again

[hadlock]

I was surprised to find out just now that the last time Russia tested a nuclear weapon was, October 1990. Looks like most of their testing locations are/were located in former soviet bloc countries. Presumably that means any newer designs than what were tested in the 1980s, have never actually been tested before, and those that have, might be almost 35 years old.

[sbierwagen]

The comprehensive test ban treaty: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Nuclear-Test-Ban...

The US also hasn't tested since 1992. Given the situation with B-2 heat exchangers, F-22 spare parts and FOGBANK, I would not be interested in betting large amounts of money that American nuclear weapons are fully functional either.

Interestingly enough, both the US and Russia routinely test fire ICBMs. So we know the rockets work, but not the warheads.

A very awkward exchange would be if Putin goes nuts and orders a first strike, we do a "use em or lose em" ICBM launch, and all the warheads fizzle over their intended targets. What then? Awkward coughing and shuffling of feet? Roll the tanks for a full-scale war in Europe? If the nuclear umbrella truly was the only thing preventing direct Great Power conflict, then do we shrug and institute 20th century-style mass conscription and blow the dust off all the century old war stockpiles?

[ouid]

I believe that much of the work done in our nuclear laboratories is verification that the nuclear weapons work. They do not fall tremendously out of disrepair, as fissile material does not degrade much over the timescale of 20 years, and the degradation that occurs is extremely well studied. Your hopefulness is, for better or worse, extraordinarily unlikely.

[jostmey]

Oh, I’m sure a significant fraction of nuclear weapons would work, and the results would be horrible. It’s just that large fraction might not work. I don’t think Putin would want to reveal this because it means he lacks the capacity to fully eliminate the United States

[nowandlater]

For the US, I highly recommend the Nuclear Posture Review, which is compiled by and details the current administration's policy as it relates to its nuclear stockpile and strategic purpose.

The last one, 2018: https://media.defense.gov/2018/Feb/02/2001872886/-1/-1/1/201...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Posture_Review

[nickff]

You have to ask yourself what he would achieve by using nuclear weapons, and what the costs would be. Using nuclear weapons seems unlikely to benefit the Putin regime in any way, and risks destablizing his position, both from inside and outside Russia.

Putin is not crazy, he is acting rationally from his perspective (though it may be hard to understand). My suspicion is that the reports of him having cancer are correct, and the Ukraine invasion was a way to bolster and secure his position in the face of doubt caused by the cancer.

[azornathogron]

> Putin is not crazy, [...] the Ukraine invasion was a way to bolster and secure his position in the face of doubt caused by the cancer.

Although I (think I) know what you mean, the idea of starting a war, killing thousands of people, destroying cities and destroying the Russian economy all to avoid looking weak due to cancer... well, it certainty sounds pretty fucking crazy to me.

[ben_w]

I get the sentiment.

I think “rational” and “crazy” are not incompatible; to me, a lack of empathy is a type of crazy, and yet I also think people who lack empathy can make rational or irrational decisions about how to reach their goals.

I’m not sure I’d count Putin as rational even given a lack of empathy, given what seems to happen to successful Russian generals even before this war.

[zamalek]

Psychopaths and sociopaths can be surmised as: acquisition of power and self-preservation. A nuclear war is also a nuclear war for Putin; he would perish along with the rest of us, or soon after us (especially with no infrastructure to treat his cancer).

Suicide is a terminal disease. Psychopathy is a chronic condition. You could suffer from both, but we've never seen suicidal tendencies from Putin.

[nickff]

Illness and/or the prospect of death usually destabilizes dictatorships, as the regime's supporters try to secure their positions by selecting a successor who will preserve the status quo (or a favorable change).

I think Putin believed that this would be a quick victory, capturing the Eastern oblasts, and either negotiating a settlement with the Ukrainians, or conquering the country and installing a puppet regime. This is what most analysts seem to have expected, and the fierce Ukrainian resistance is what's forced the West to implement strong sanctions.

[labster]

I agree with everything in your post but the word “forced”, which is not quite right. It’s hard to sanction a fait accompli, sure. But there was a certain eagerness in the West for at least some sanctions. A lot happened in just one week.

[kurthr]

As in start Nuclear Testing in "free" Ukraine?