At the time the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI) was expected to work, the plan was to scale that up. The idea is that some sites would be defended even in a saturation attack where it would be unlikely that Russia would devote enough ICBMs to a single target. There have been attempts to restart it with more lasers. Even now it’s seen as a matter of time - believing the hype from Lockheed and Raytheon. I hope it is only hype but maybe enough lasers could work. I would hate to find out it doesn’t work the hard way.
I could tell back then (>20 years ago) that cheap drones were the future but doing a bad job on expensive things provided job security so no one was interested in doing a good job on cheap things. I quickly switched career to big tech.
Some decision makers in the US are oddly ok with getting nuked so long as they can still call it a win, one single American and no Russians. Suburban sprawl was encouraged as diffusion was seen as a survival strategy. Then you have Baptists that see nuclear holocaust as an essential part of the rapture so they can go to heaven without dying and be with their resurrected relatives. A really dangerous belief held by plenty of people in the military.
I’m of the view that it’s only a matter of time before space is militarized, especially if Trump gets elected again. And if we do that then Russia and China will want to do that as well. I am assuming their base on the moon plans are a cover for launch capacity investments to get nukes into space.
People in the military think about the ‘unthinkable’ all of the time. I think the current framing of nuclear exchange as unthinkable is only done as part of the wests propaganda to allow the west to push red lines harder than what would be otherwise permitted.
As per realpolitik, nation states are immensely paranoid and often think if we don’t do X then Y will and with that can justify doing some truly awful things. Dr Strangelove is less of an over the top satire and more of an oddly accurate portrayal. Even the ability for a first strike nuclear attack by a military commander without presidential approval was accurate despite being classified at the time, I wonder if someone leaked the idea to Kubrick as a round about attempt to show the world how nuts it is in an effort to get popular pressure to apply political pressure to fix it. Have they fixed it, I don’t know but either way they would tell us they have and keep the truth classified.
Look, you're illustrating a lot of well-documented concerns with a pretty panicked tone. This discussion has existed for more than a half-century, and it's died down because the first world cannot tolerate these developments. Russia depends on a peaceable status-quo in order to threaten it's neighbors; China relies on good international standing to trade with relevant currency. We discuss the circumstances surrounding nuclear warfare in these terms because it's the only relevant framework for understanding it; the "red lines" don't mean anything without context, no less than China's famous "Final Warning".
You think this framing is only relevant for western interests; you're right. But it's also startlingly realistic, has popular support, and overwhelmingly disadvantages China and Russia. If nuclear blackmail worked, any nuclear power could demand anything; now they have to do the unthinkable. Given that nobody wants to be nuked, this second-strike guillotine has effectively deterred any self-preserving nation from launching an inhumane nuclear strike.
To change the circumstances surrounding this discussion, you need urgent and credible evidence, not frantic refutations and scaremongering. The United States' calm and collected posture towards nuclear deterrence works, and it has extremely effective contingency plans if it ever fails.
> I wonder if someone leaked the idea to Kubrick as a round about attempt to show the world how nuts it is in an effort to get popular pressure to apply political pressure to fix it.
Did it ever cross your mind that people were discussing this concept back in the 1960s too? If you can believe it, there was actually a non-negligible interest in understanding the nuclear chain of command, known by some as "the Cold War".
Russia gave 'final warnings' about invading Ukraine which at the time was considered unthinkable by many because the presumed damage the international community could inflict on Russia would be so great that Russia would have to capitulate. So much so the west felt free to ignore Russia warnings and invite Ukraine into NATO. Now I guess Russia winning that war is the new 'unthinkable' underpinning the rational for Ukraine not accepting proposed peace deals. Honestly, I don't see how Ukraine wins that war so I'm again at odds which is what is considered 'unthinkable'.
Far from being panicked I'm not even worried about a nuclear war - we're far more likely to have a drone war from which the economic damage would be so great the US will not be able to afford to maintain global dominance. The US felt free to give up it's low value manufacturing base and focus on high value manufacturing and financialization so it's rather unfortunate that cheap drones and a large low value manufacturing base will be what wins future conflicts. Look at how much economic damage the Houthis are doing to Israel - we were told Operation Prosperity Guardian would work as the international community would get together and secure shipping. And if the shield didn't work we'd bomb Yemen into submission, like no-one has tried that one before. Clearly neither has worked and Houthi blackmailing is being very effective. Now imagine a world full of state sponsored terrorists doing their own drone blackmailing with conflicting and impossible to meet demands. So much infrastructure which underpins our current standard of living is at risk. It was clear to me >20 years ago that it made no sense shooting down $10K drones with $1M missiles, I wanted to work on drone counter measures but even back then military development is highly politicized, corrupt, and slow that I saw no viable path for such development.
Fair enough, not an official final invitation but an official invitation to increase ties with the intent of there being an official MAP at a later date. In my view that is a distinction without a meaningful difference.
Perhaps you're thinking had there been an official invitation and Ukraine quickly accepted then there wouldn't be a Russia-Ukraine war as they would be covered under article 5. I think it's an open question if the US would declare war on Russia in such an instance. I think the reluctance to allow a quick ascension in the first place is born out of the same reluctance to enter such a war. The US is only as bound by treaties as it wants to be. The US could of course meet the letter of article 5 but not the spirit by providing a token response instead of the total war response people are expecting.
In my view that is a distinction without a meaningful difference.
Completely disagree -- the decision to heed Russia's request and not issue the MAPs to George and Ukraine in 2008 (where the matter has stayed ever since) was an important de-escalatory step and hugely significant. As Putin's sockpuppet Medvedev said at the time: "Reason has prevailed".
The rest of the stuff about what might have happened had they been issued and accepted gets into the realm of hypotheticals, which is not my turf.
I could tell back then (>20 years ago) that cheap drones were the future but doing a bad job on expensive things provided job security so no one was interested in doing a good job on cheap things. I quickly switched career to big tech.
Some decision makers in the US are oddly ok with getting nuked so long as they can still call it a win, one single American and no Russians. Suburban sprawl was encouraged as diffusion was seen as a survival strategy. Then you have Baptists that see nuclear holocaust as an essential part of the rapture so they can go to heaven without dying and be with their resurrected relatives. A really dangerous belief held by plenty of people in the military.
I’m of the view that it’s only a matter of time before space is militarized, especially if Trump gets elected again. And if we do that then Russia and China will want to do that as well. I am assuming their base on the moon plans are a cover for launch capacity investments to get nukes into space.
People in the military think about the ‘unthinkable’ all of the time. I think the current framing of nuclear exchange as unthinkable is only done as part of the wests propaganda to allow the west to push red lines harder than what would be otherwise permitted.
As per realpolitik, nation states are immensely paranoid and often think if we don’t do X then Y will and with that can justify doing some truly awful things. Dr Strangelove is less of an over the top satire and more of an oddly accurate portrayal. Even the ability for a first strike nuclear attack by a military commander without presidential approval was accurate despite being classified at the time, I wonder if someone leaked the idea to Kubrick as a round about attempt to show the world how nuts it is in an effort to get popular pressure to apply political pressure to fix it. Have they fixed it, I don’t know but either way they would tell us they have and keep the truth classified.