Ukraine Watch...

[BritDownUnder]

It would also be fascinating to know just where the UK's ICBMs are targeted
Many, many years ago I worked in defence.
I was assigned to a certain project which I assumed would be targetted at Russia ... I was astonished to find where it was actually targetted.
Sorry, can't say more.

Sounds interesting.

My targeting orders, assuming the whole of mainland UK was devastated by a Russian attack and the US allowed the dual key to be used, would be as follows. Assume one ballistic missile sub with 16 missiles on station in Northern Atlantic and two cruise missile armed subs with 10 missiles each were available, one in Northern Pacific and one in Norther Atlantic.

My aim would not be to kill large numbers of Russians per se but to damage their capacity to wage war and their future capacity to be civilised. I suspect that their ABM capacity is probably quite good.

In chronological order.
Three ballistic missiles for EMP attacks over the populated areas of western and central Russia.
Cruise missile attacks on major Russian ports, St Petersburg, Murmansk, Archangelsk, Vladivostok, Magadan and Novorossiysk. Five cruise missiles and RN/RAF from Cyprus to take care of Novorossiysk.
Cruise missile attacks on accessible military industrial infrastructure and ABM sites. Allow six.
Attacks on electrical infrastructure such as nuclear power stations, hydro power stations and switchyards and transport infrastructure such as railways and canal locks. Allow 5 ballistic missiles.
'Salted' cobalt bombs to irradiate the best Russian farmland for a few decades. Allow 5 cruise missiles.
Remaining available cruise missiles to be used to attack Chinese cities/ABM sites.
Remaining ballistic missiles to be used to attack N Korea, Iran and then China.

[Vortex2]

Maybe a few nukes would get through
Russia has historically had poor missile accuracy.
They made up for this by building large weapons
The West might use precision 150KT -350KT weapons .. but a Russian warhead could well be closer to 2MT.
That's a lot of oomf.

I'm moving to a remote part of Wales...

A 25MT warhead on Colchester would flatten London ......

We have 200+ warheads aimed at us, and only 5 - 8 would be needed to wipe the UK out.

[UndercoverElephant]

Maybe a few nukes would get through
Russia has historically had poor missile accuracy.
They made up for this by building large weapons
The West might use precision 150KT -350KT weapons .. but a Russian warhead could well be closer to 2MT.
That's a lot of oomf.

I'm moving to a remote part of Wales...

A 25MT warhead on Colchester would flatten London ......

We have 200+ warheads aimed at us, and only 5 - 8 would be needed to wipe the UK out.

I am not interested in your scaremongering. It is irrelevant. If Putin is crazy enough to start a nuclear war then there is going to be a nuclear war. If London is flattened, then London is flattened. What is guaranteed is that if London is flattened, every major city in Russia will also be flattened. There is no question about this. We don't know how effective Russia's attacks would be, but we do know how effective NATO's response would be. And so does Vladimir Putin, which is why it isn't going to happen.

Thank God the people actually making the decisions do not think like you. You would have backed Neville Chamberlain in 1939.

[kenneal - lagger]

If we do a Neville Chamberlain now and appease the modern day Hitler we will see Putin sending his troops into another country in a few years time. And they might even have learned a thing or two from their disastrous campaign in Ukraine. Putin will also have the industrial resources of Ukraine to bolster Russia's own resources.

So we will have to confront him at some time or do we just keel over, Vortex and give him everything that he wants? Do we all just say that to live under the cosh of a brutal, sadistic dictator who jail's people for 15 years for describing a war as a war, who poisons his enemies, is better than putting up a fight?

[BritDownUnder]

As you can see from the discussion and from my analysis the present situation of the UK regarding nuclear weapons is not that good.

Putin issues these threats specifically at the UK because it has a 'semi' independent nuclear deterrent and because it is a rather unpopular country in the world standing, particularly after Brexit and I suspect that if a nuclear attack were specifically directed at the UK by Russia there is a good chance of other countries, even the US not actually doing anything about it in response.

This leads me to view the status of the UK's nuclear weapons as being very inadequate. In all probability 75% of the submarine based ballistic weapons would be destroyed in dock or storage by a first strike by Russia. My assumption of the nuclear cruise missiles available on British submarines is very optimistic. I would suggest to the UK government that they put nuclear warheads on almost all naval vessels higher than patrol boat size and work on getting air to ground nuclear stand off missiles as a matter of urgency. Also increase the yields of every nuclear weapon to the highest possible size.
Then work on stationing nuclear weapons on offshore dependencies, e.g. Bermuda, Falklands, even Pitcairn or Gibraltar.

From what I understand the recent Russian missile tested will be able to carry 10 - 12 MIRV warheads of 1 - 2 Megatons yield each. I have no idea on the spread of warheads of a MIRV (multiple independently targeted re-entry vehicle) but it may be good to assume that one missile could scatter MIRVs over the whole of the UK. From wikipedia it looks like the 50% fatality radius of a 1 MT warhead is about 8km so allowing for a few for London you could probably kill just under 50% of the population of the 8 largest cities in the UK and cause reasonably severe destruction to all buildings in them.

[UndercoverElephant]

the UK ...is a rather unpopular country in the world standing, particularly after Brexit

The UK has been unpopular in recent times in Europe. That has been clearly reflected by our repeated last places in recent Eurovision song contests. It is possible that the UK's leading role in supplying weapons to Ukraine might have changed this. We will find out in a couple of weeks. If the UK doesn't come last, we'll know something has changed.

and I suspect that if a nuclear attack were specifically directed at the UK by Russia there is a good chance of other countries, even the US not actually doing anything about it in response.

The chance of that happening is nil, because of article 5 of NATO's constitution. Politics has nothing to do with it. If any NATO country is attacked - with any sort of weapons - then there will be a very robust response.

[Vortex2]

Britain is sending 8,000 troops to Eastern Europe in one of the largest deployments since the Cold War.

Tanks, artillery guns, armoured assault vehicles and aircraft are also being sent to bolster Nato forces, in what Ben Wallace, the Defence Secretary, described as a “show of solidarity and strength”.

We are getting there step-by-step.

I wish we had a basement.

[Stumuz2]

Britain is sending 8,000 troops to Eastern Europe in one of the largest deployments since the Cold War.

Tanks, artillery guns, armoured assault vehicles and aircraft are also being sent to bolster Nato forces, in what Ben Wallace, the Defence Secretary, described as a “show of solidarity and strength”.

We are getting there step-by-step.

I wish we had a basement.

Have to disagree Vortex.

A sovereign country has been invaded, occupied, and war crimes committed.

If you were Prime minister, what would you do?

[BritDownUnder]

the UK ...is a rather unpopular country in the world standing, particularly after Brexit

The UK has been unpopular in recent times in Europe. That has been clearly reflected by our repeated last places in recent Eurovision song contests. It is possible that the UK's leading role in supplying weapons to Ukraine might have changed this. We will find out in a couple of weeks. If the UK doesn't come last, we'll know something has changed.

and I suspect that if a nuclear attack were specifically directed at the UK by Russia there is a good chance of other countries, even the US not actually doing anything about it in response.

The chance of that happening is nil, because of article 5 of NATO's constitution. Politics has nothing to do with it. If any NATO country is attacked - with any sort of weapons - then there will be a very robust response.

I wish I could agree with you and I hope you are right. When the UK was 'attacked' with Russian chemical weapons there was a great reluctance of European countries to even expel Russian diplomats. I understand there was a 'get out clause' for them not to help regarding the Falklands and also a lack of help from many countries regarding the Troubles.

Perhaps some might say the the UK deserves a nuclear attack due to Ukraine policy and there is a get out clause on that too.

[Catweazle]

I don't agree that other countries will be at risk from Putin if Ukraine falls. In no way would I suggest we should cease hardware support for Ukraine, but if it proved inadequate NATO would fortify the new borders to the extent that a Russian invasion would be impossible.

The game has moved on, Russia now knows that tanks are not going to win wars in future, they'll be lucky if they can raise an army once the details of this invasion leak back to the Russian public - the myth of Russian armoured superiority is well and truly busted.

[UndercoverElephant]

When the UK was 'attacked' with Russian chemical weapons

The UK wasn't attacked with chemical weapons. That was the (attempted) assasination of a dissident. It does not help to misrepresent it.

Also, NATO "help" in Ireland wasn't wanted, and in the Falklands wasn't needed.

[Vortex2]

Vladimir Putin will announce the need to "mass mobilise the Russian people", Ben Wallace, the Defence Secretary, has said.

"He is probably going to declare on May Day that we are now at war with the world's Nazis and we need to mass mobilise the Russian people",' Mr Wallace said on Friday morning.- Daily Telegraph

Well, I hope the armchair bullet buyers will enjoy the coming conflict.

This is clearly a US-inspired attempt at regime change and/or resource grab ... Ukraine is sadly a proxy war being used to justify this.

[Stumuz2]

Vladimir Putin will announce the need to "mass mobilise the Russian people", Ben Wallace, the Defence Secretary, has said.

"He is probably going to declare on May Day that we are now at war with the world's Nazis and we need to mass mobilise the Russian people",' Mr Wallace said on Friday morning.- Daily Telegraph

Well, I hope the armchair bullet buyers will enjoy the coming conflict.

This is clearly a US-inspired attempt at regime change and/or resource grab ... Ukraine is sadly a proxy war being used to justify this.

So, what would you do?

[Stumuz2]

When the UK was 'attacked' with Russian chemical weapons.

You are absolutely correct. Russia deployed both chemical and radiological weapons in the UK.

[kenneal - lagger]

When the UK was 'attacked' with Russian chemical weapons.

You are absolutely correct. Russia deployed both chemical and radiological weapons in the UK.

And killed one UK resident and injured others.