I wonder if Ukraine still had their nuclear weapons, if any of this horror would have happened?

[Evolve Dammit]

I also wonder where the "Christians" are condemning this massive loss of life and genocide? Not hearing anything making it to MSM but am sure some (Universalist Unitarians, Friends are). Loud condemnation is called for in the face of an unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation with massive loss of human life. Watching is is gut-wrenching as it seems like WWII atrocities all over again. That is unacceptable and yet most Americans seem marginally interested.

[dchill]

1. It's almost like "Christianity" is on hiatus.

(Other than Franklin Graham praying for Putin.)

[Evolve Dammit]

11. And the pulpit leaders calling for Joe to be jailed... and the Chosen One to be resurrected.

[RKP5637]

2. I find, anymore, many people don't give a damn unless something directly involves them.

Like those that take pictures of a rape, beating, potential murder, whatever, and can't be bothered to dial "911."

[Evolve Dammit]

10. Sadly, I agree. U.S. just tuning out for the large part. Not all, but millions just don't give a

shit. Of course that's what elected Orange Julius and keeps us from having a resolution to ANYTHING with divided court justices. Allows for the emergence of vile troglodytes like Gohmert, MTG, Gaetz, King, DeSatan, Gosert, Meadows, Bannon, Ghouliani, etc. Orange Boys spawn just rode in on the ill wind. May they ride out in disgrace, although I don't know if disgrace means anything anymore. Proud Boys, Oaf Keepers, 1 per centers, KKK, neo-nazis. old nazis, middle-aged Nazis....

[onecaliberal]

3. Nope. It sure wouldn't be.

[shelshaw]

4. Are we 100% that Ukraine didn't keep a spare?

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. A counterfactual with them keeping nukes in the 90s gets complicated

How much would they have had to spend to maintain them? What credible delivery system did they have, and how defensible was it against attack? What if a pro-Russia president, like Yanukovych, gave them to Russia anyway? What if him being in control of nukes had deterred the Maidan Revolution, or created a Ukrainian military that stuck with the president on the grounds that a coup in a nuclear-armed country is a bad thing?

The Pope had been doing OK, but seems to be trying to be neutral now:

Pope Francis has offered no shortage of kind words for the beleaguered people of Ukraine. He has decried the “cruel and senseless” war inflicted on them, blamed the invasion on an unnamed “potentate” and prayed for peace.
...
Francis’s relationship with Ukrainians was “shaken to its core” in particular by the Vatican’s Way of the Cross procession through Rome’s Colosseum on Good Friday, say critics.

The Church had a Ukrainian and a Russian woman hold the cross during the procession, accompanied by a text that stressed peace and reconciliation between peoples — but made no mention of who had started the war and prosecuted it so brutally.
...
Then, on the same day, the Vatican’s Kyiv ambassador and a cardinal from Poland met with the main Ukrainian leader of the Russian Orthodox Church, which has acted as sort of a spiritual cheerleader for the invasion.

https://nationalpost.com/news/world/why-the-popes-gesture-of-ukraine-russia-reconciliation-has-angered-many-followers

[Evolve Dammit]

9. Sigh. Thanks for the response.

[Torchlight]

6. I think our disinterest goes far beyond one conflict.

"That is unacceptable and yet most Americans seem marginally interested."

I've felt that for some time. The genocides in Darfur and Rwanda appeared to raise no eyebrows or hackles in the west. We all just slept through it and allowed it to continue.

[Evolve Dammit]

7. Not disagreeing at all. You are correct

[okaawhatever]

8. Agree w/Muriel above, but also Ukraine never had control of the nukes. The

All controls were always in Moscow,

[WhiskeyGrinder]

12. They weren't Ukraine's nuclear weapons.

If Ukraine had "kept" them, they wouldn't have been able to use them, because the technical know-how was Moscow's. They also didn't have the facilities or resources to maintain those weapons.

[Evolve Dammit]

13. Well that sucks. They had no control and the nukes were in Ukraine?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

15. It was similar to (though not exactly like) federal properties in individual states.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

17. Yep

Nuclear weapons have something called Permissive Action Links on them to prevent unauthorized use. Early ones were essential mechanical locks that required the correct combination to unlock and arm them. Later version were much more sophisticated. Moscow had control of these codes. Without them, the weapons could not be armed. They are designed to be tamperproof, with lockout features, as well as self destruct features. Also, bypassing them would basically require you to dismantle the warhead.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

14. The weapons would be useless by now

Without regular maintenance, those warheads would be little more than material for dirty bombs. They wouldn't work. Tritium has a half life of a little over 12 years. Electronics, the conventional explosives, and other materials all degrade from the constant exposure to radiation and need to be replaced. The cores themselves, while stable enough to last decades or longer, have corrosion issues and periodically need to be remachined to clean it up. Ukraine did not have the skills or facilities to maintain them. Nor could they have developed those skills quickly after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Things were fairly chaotic, corruption was(arguably still) rampant, and they had bigger problems to deal with then trying to maintain security on a bunch of weapons they lacked the skill and operational control over. Which comes to another problem, they had no control of the weapons. They were physically located in Ukrainian territory but under Russian control.

[Evolve Dammit]

16. thanks. Good analysis