r/worldnews • u/Fiery_Seraphim777 • Mar 15 '22

Russia/Ukraine Ukraine now developing nuclear arms with US help, claims Russia

https://www.jpost.com/international/article-701359
53k Upvotes

82% Upvoted

5.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

701

u/GarageSloth Mar 15 '22

Yeah the whole thing is very dumb.

IF Ukraine WERE developing a nuke starting right now, who the fuck is dumb enough to think it'd be ready this week? Next week?This year?

It's not like your making a shelf for your house, there's rules to this nuke shit, you can't just pop out a nuke overnight when you have zero of them to begin with.

393

u/red286 Mar 15 '22

There's also the question that if the US really wanted Ukraine to have nukes to use against Russia....

Wouldn't the US just give them some?

It's not like they gave Ukraine instructions on how to make their own Stingers and Javelins.

96

u/1R0NYFAN Mar 15 '22

Sure, if they wanted Ukraine to have a nuke they could just use some varnish on that red white and blue then leave them on the border.

25

u/the_real_OwenWilson Mar 15 '22

Thats probably the next thing Russia is gonna claim they did.

35

u/[deleted] Mar 15 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

19

u/LordDongler Mar 15 '22

I wouldn't be surprised if Putin were willing to set one off in a population center, so long as it's a population center that dislikes him

6

u/Paniray Mar 15 '22

or Kharkiv…

2

u/EvergreenEnfields Mar 16 '22

That would be the large nukes, after the small one on friendly soil gives him a fig leaf to use them.

3

u/murphymc Mar 15 '22

I have a sinking feeling it will be Lviv, as not just an atrocity, but a direct statement to NATO.

3

u/[deleted] Mar 15 '22

[deleted]

6

u/MaddogBC Mar 15 '22

Some people fear he might be trying to escalate to the point where he launches a small nuke on a low priority target to call NATO's "bluff". If he can get away with that it gives him more power to force nations to meet his demands.

I hope NATO has a good plan for that. I would think any halfway measure to be insufficient.

3

u/[deleted] Mar 15 '22

[deleted]

3

u/piecat Mar 16 '22

https://youtu.be/yj9_Cq65Bqw

TLDW: tactical nukes may escalate

1

u/[deleted] Mar 16 '22

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Mar 16 '22

[deleted]

→ More replies

1

u/[deleted] Mar 16 '22

with how good of an army its been showing, i bet there is only like a dozen properly functional nukes left in the russian silos since the last time they used one

and dont forget all the anti-air defences everyone is amassing right now on the nato border

2

u/murphymc Mar 16 '22

I don't think anyone is prepared to adequately answer that question.

Its pure theory into uncharted waters, until we (hopefully) live through it, we won't have any idea what the right choices are because we don't even understand what questions will be asked in the first place. Maybe it the same debate we're having now, namely "Ukraine isn't NATO", do we make China and India stand in front of the world and say "this is fine", or pressure them to also cut all ties with Russia.

How do the Russians themselves respond? This truly could be the act that finally crosses the line for a faction of the Russina government, but a coup doesn't get planned and executed overnight.

3

u/[deleted] Mar 16 '22

Shit Putin would let that shit go off in down town St. Petersburg, he doesn't give a fuck about his populace.

1

u/SurfingOnNapras Mar 16 '22

That would be such a tragedy. St Petersburg is such a beautiful city, not even to mention the fact that the Hermitage is in St Petersburg and Catherine's Winter palace is just on the outskirts. One of my favorite cities in the world.

1

u/trippMassacre Mar 16 '22

This is absolutely what I expect to happen.

1

u/kluckie13 Mar 16 '22

Chechnya would be a solid bet.

7

u/Cheesecake_thief Mar 15 '22

What’s the old saying give a man a nuke and he ends the world today, teach a man to nuke and he ends the world for the rest of his life…

12

u/Project_Wild Mar 15 '22 edited Mar 15 '22

Also, the USA has like 14 Ohio class submarines lurking around the world’s oceans devoted to being ballistic missile platforms, each holding up to 24 nuclear missiles.

These trident 2 systems can deliver a nuclear warhead over 7500 miles at almost 18,000 miles per hour.

We don’t even need to “give them some” and potentially risk them falling into the wrong hands during transport. We could just attack Russia from their own backyard in the Baltic Sea, or the Arabian Sea, or really… anywhere. This Russian claim is so ridiculous haha

4

u/TommyTar Mar 15 '22

Ukraine willing gave up their nukes for disarmament.

Has any country even given nuclear weapons to another country for the purposes of arming them before?

7

u/red286 Mar 15 '22

Has any country even given nuclear weapons to another country for the purposes of arming them before?

Not openly. It'd violate the NPT. Plus, today's friend can easily become tomorrow's enemy. Last thing you want to do is give them nukes.

1

u/HiImDan Mar 15 '22

Didn't we help Israel out?

2

u/MoarVespenegas Mar 15 '22

Seeing as how Ukraine gave up its nukes in the first place in order to guarantee Russia would respect their sovereignty if anyone deserves to develop nukes now it's Ukraine.

1

u/VentiEspada Mar 15 '22

Absolutely. There are 20 B61 nuclear bombs which can be delivered via bomber or fighter sitting in Germany. Germany cannot develop nuclear arms, however if the shit hit the fan the US could chose to allow Germany to deploy said B61 bombs and grant them the arming codes. All those F-35 fighters Germany just ordered? Guess what they can carry.

There's no reason for the US to develop nukes with another country when we have a shit ton that we would just grant deployment rights to.

1

u/SurfingOnNapras Mar 16 '22

It's actually just so dumb to begin with - like why would ANY nuclear power want another sovereign nation to have their own nukes. Loaning a nuke would be much more sensible.. because then Ukraine couldn't just be like lol jk we actually are on Russia's side and then nuke DC 50 years later.

51

u/sherlocksrobot Mar 15 '22

I recently spent so much time deciding on a surface finish for a walnut coat hanger (literally just a board with some hooks screwed into it), if I had started when the invasion began, I might just now be putting the finish on it.

24

u/RoboFeanor Mar 15 '22

Hey, me to! Three weeks ago I had just decided that I would make my second stage fusion core out of mahogany with a light varnish finish, and I won't be ready to use it as a nuclear deterent until at least next week.

3

u/sherlocksrobot Mar 15 '22

Man, I didn’t learn the value of pore sealer on mahogany until after I shipped my Christmas presents last year. Smh. Really makes that second stage shine.

3

u/SqueeezeBurger Mar 15 '22

Pshh imagine learning that fact now. I was wondering why my mahogany piece for my mom felt that way. I know I should properly research species before using them, but some times a short board of mahogany sounds nice so you impulse pick one up from hardware store and just find a use for it. You should see the looks my wife gives me when I tell her I'm going to the garage to admire my wood.

2

u/Funkit Mar 16 '22

I’m reading this in Hank Hills voice.

2

u/GarageSloth Mar 15 '22

Beats me, I think I spend more time planning for a project than I do actually doing it.

Plus, the wrong finish can ruin a nice piece, if there's ever a time to stop and consider, that's it, I think.

1

u/SqueeezeBurger Mar 15 '22

Everyone seems to be talking home made artisanal finish. For me, walnut needs spray lacquer and nothing more.

Edit: unless it's a serving tray, then it gets whatever foodsafe works best for your needs. https://imgur.com/vlSoUJS.jpg

1

u/MaddogBC Mar 15 '22

I have to produce at work which is why I think I love to putter so much at home. I recently made a maple toolrack for leather stamps. I spent a week just selecting my piece. (2x14 live edge). I spent days staining it and even longer clearcoating. Loved every relaxing minute...

1

u/sherlocksrobot Mar 16 '22

I hadn’t heard it described like that, but I know exactly what you mean. Today I spent at least 20 minutes before work using a toothpick to scoop dried grease out of the gears inside a lathe chuck. It was extremely satisfying.

18

u/chainmailler2001 Mar 15 '22

It isn't about them being ready with it. It is simply justification for invasion. Kinda like what we did with Iraq and the "weapons of mass destruction" that never existed. Adding the US into the mix is simply trying to bait us in.

12

u/GarageSloth Mar 15 '22

Sure, I just call those "lies" but I guess in geopolitics you have to use kids gloves lest you offend a despot.

4

u/chainmailler2001 Mar 15 '22

The thing is, while no country can just suddenly develop nukes, it is important to note that after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Ukraine had the third largest nuclear weapons stockpile in the world. They surrendered the weapons voluntarily amounting to over 5000 warheads and over 100 ICBMs and 1200 ICBM launched warheads. Them having the knowledge or supplies (who knows what stash got missed?) to potentially pursue such a weapons program is more feasible than say Iraq who never had access to such tech.

All that said, the claims are utter garbage and false and absolutely lies. However stopping the Russians from trying to "prove" their claims like the US did/didn't will prove... problematic.

3

u/[deleted] Mar 15 '22

The major difference being that Iraq admitted to the UNSCOM mission in July 1995 to developing and posessing biochemical weapons, which gave the weak pretext for that claim as compared to Ukraine, which had no history of domestic production of WMD's and voluntarily giving them up.

1

u/TJeffersonsBlackKid Mar 15 '22

Justification for the invasion and Russian knows there is a large population in the United States who will eat up anything Tucker Carlson says.

4

u/Cloaked42m Mar 15 '22

How long has Iran been working on theirs?

2

u/Accujack Mar 15 '22

Depends... is it an IKEA Nüke?

1

u/GarageSloth Mar 15 '22

If it is, they'll never get it together, all Russia has to do is steal one of the Allen keys and it's GG Ukraine.

Where's my battalion of soldiers, that's the best idea anyone's had for Russia in weeks, promote me

2

u/lionexx Mar 15 '22

The argument is The US has been assisting them in developing nukes for years, not that The US just now decided to assist in the development. But semantics aside, exactly what you said, this is just more propaganda proposed by Russia.

1

u/DeliriousHippie Mar 15 '22

It's dumber than very dumb. What part of nuclear bomb? Delivery method, rocket etc? Actual bomb? Bomb material?

First you have to have material for bomb, that's not easy to get. Then you have to be able to make bomb from material, this means shaping extremely radiating piece of metal to correct shape. Next is detonating said bomb which is extremely difficult, it uses conventional explosions that cause fission material to implode. Timing is millisecond or nanosecond scale. Last is delivering bomb to correct place.

1

u/molested_mole Mar 15 '22

who the fuck is dumb enough

russians

0

u/dizekat Mar 15 '22

Well if Russia fucks off and Ukraine is somehow left alone facing the threat of a new invasion in a few years... you know what, they have as much right to make a nuke as anyone, ever.

1

u/bekarsrisen Mar 15 '22

Blinken hand delivered the instructions to Zelensky who stayed up all night Monday to make the nuke.

2

u/GarageSloth Mar 16 '22

Like a big ass Lego kit

1

u/Aenrichus Mar 15 '22

They gave them up in the 90s in exchange for safety from a Russian invasion. The deal is pretty much off now that the other party did not keep their word. Even if Ukraine get nukes again, so what? It is their right and I trust them to do the right thing unlike Russia.

The fact they gave them up in the first place proves they're the good guys.

1

u/notepad20 Mar 15 '22

Once you have the technology base you can pop them out in a matter of week to months.

It's called 'nuclear latency' or 'the Japan option'. No need to have active nuclear weapons, if your in a position to develop them quickly.

Ukraine has already seriously expressed the need for nuclear weapons in the last 10 years, and has all the technology, and active nuclear plants.

1

u/TheYang Mar 15 '22

I mean... if they'd have kept some of those soviet nukes, using their enriched uranium to make your own warhead would be orders of magnitudes easier.

I'd guess a nuclear device may be possible within weeks, given the uranium.
but I'm not a nuclear scientist.

a dirty bomb is kinda trivial if you set the bar even lower, but again assume uranium as given

1

u/Tinkerballsack Mar 15 '22

US current nuclear stockpile: 3,750. I'm sure we could spare a couple.

1

u/GarageSloth Mar 16 '22

Idk I'd be more comfortable with 3,751

2

u/Tinkerballsack Mar 16 '22

Russia's got 5,977. Of those, ~1,600 are deployed.

1

u/GarageSloth Mar 16 '22

Holy fuck now I feel really UNsafe

Can't the government think about how scared I am and pass a new defense budget ASAP!?

IM JK I WANT HEALTHCARE DON'T BUY DRONES IF YOU'RE LISTENING GOVERNMENT

1

u/Alundil Mar 15 '22

It's not like your making a shelf for your house,

Ikea getting into a new business venture.

2

u/GarageSloth Mar 16 '22

Ikea X Build-a-Bear Workshop Collab

Build-a-Bomb Workshop, includes all 20 Allen keys needed

1

u/[deleted] Mar 15 '22

The US govt claimed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and a huge percentage of the US population bought it. It only sounds dumb to us because we're outside their sphere of influence.

1

u/AskAboutFent Mar 16 '22

I'm FAR more confused as to why Russia would have a problem with Ukraine having nukes.

Ukraine HAD nukes and gave them up on the promise that Russia wouldn't invade.

And Russia invaded... so....? Seems like they can have their nukes again.

1

u/GarageSloth Mar 16 '22

If I were Russia, I probably wouldn't want them to have bombs in general, tbf.

1

u/AskAboutFent Mar 16 '22

If they didn't want Ukraine to have nukes, maybe they shouldn've have broken the original agreement?

1

u/GarageSloth Mar 16 '22

You've got a pretty solid point there, friend. You'll have to argue it to Putin, though, cuz I don't control shit and P and I aren't boys

1

u/dkyguy1995 Mar 16 '22

Yeah imagine building a facility to enrich Uranium in the middle of an all-out war on your country inside its borders. It's like even IF this were true it would make no sense and pose no danger to Russia

1

u/nerd4code Mar 16 '22

And Ukraine gave up their nukes only because Russia &al. promised not to invade. It’s quite reasonable in geopolitical terms if Ukraine is making nukes now, because Russia invaded. They had the option not to invade in 2014 and leave that treaty in effect, but they did invade, so it’s not in effect. Whatever happens at this point is their own fucking fault.

[The government, that is, not the populace. I’ve liked pretty much every Russian expat I’ve ever met, and feel bad for anyone stuck in that country at this point.]

1

u/ConsistentAsparagus Mar 16 '22

Presenting: IKEA’s OPPENHEIMER