Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
> On 3/15/2022 10:34 AM, Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 8:39:46 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> Now, today, Russia can't take Ukraine without Chinese weapons. There's
>>> no way it's going to take down Germany, even if the rest of NATO
>>> doesn't kick in.
>>
>> Russia and China are both denying that China is selling Russia weapons
>> for use in Ukraine. Captured Russian drones show that Russia is using a
>> lot of imported chips in its weapons, but if China did start making military
>> sales to Russia for this war, *it* would start feeling the wrath of the
>> United States, even if applying sanctions to China would be far more painful
>> for the West than not trading with a largely irrelevant Russia.
>>
>> I was just watching a YouTube video on how Russia "couldn't survive" Western
>> tech sanctions. I knew beforehand that China's domestic fabs can only make
>> chips down to 14nm, which is behind the times, but not that terrible. The video
>> noted that Russia's most advanced fab... can only make chips at 65nm.
>
> That is probably those triple state chips: Yes, no, and maybe.

Bringing this back ever so slighly to SF... I did love the line
in "Dirk Gently" when the bellboy answered a question with

"Yes. No. Maybe. I don't know." and was asked: "Do you know you
just answered that question every possible way?"

On 3/15/2022 4:16 AM, Michael Dworetsky wrote:
> On 15/03/2022 05:43, Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 10:16:40 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> This is from Isabelle Khurshudyan, a/the Washington Post Moscow
>>> Correspondent, quoting Ukrainian battalion commander:
>>>
>>> “If you want to understand Russia and Ukraine, we Ukraine are Gondor.
>>> Russia is Mordor — very close and very dangerous. We need Gandalf and
>>> several hobbits.”
>>>
>>> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/14/questions-ukraine-russia-answers/>
>>>
>>
>> Unfortunately, no one has found a Ring which, if thrown into a volcano,
>> will deactivate Russia's nuclear capabilities.
>>
>> Here is my assessment of the likely course of events over the next
>> several
>> months and the next few years.
>>
>> 1) Our hopes that sanctions against Russia will bite enough to lead to
>> a palace coup against Putin are likely to be disappointed.
>>
>> 2) Our hopes that the brave defenders of Ukraine will make things so
>> difficult for Russian troops there that Russia will give up are also
>> likely to be disappointed.
>>
>> Russia sent in, as its first wave, conscripts that it knew would not be
>> fully effective. It has now sent in forces that Ukrainian fighters have
>> found more difficult to stop, and these forces are causing massive
>> civilian casualties in Ukraine.
>>
>> This will continue. The result will be a humanitarian tragedy on a
>> colossal scale, far beyond what we have seen so far. The dead will
>> number in the millions, not the thousands.
>>
>> 3) After Ukraine? Georgia and Finland are two countries in a similar
>> situation to Ukraine, so they may be next. Perhaps even Sweden.
>>
>> 4) Once it is clear that the West does not have sufficient resolve to
>> ignore a nuclear threat in order to prevent millions of people from being
>> killed by Russian forces, NATO members will now be on the list. After
>> all, a treaty is just a piece of paper; if human lives don't have enough
>> importance to inspire bravery, a piece of paper will not.
>>
>> Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia will be first.
>>
>> Then? Poland. Norway. Germany. Denmark. Belgium. Italy.
>>
>> 5) France and Britain do have nuclear weapons. But not to the extent
>> of the United States or Russia or China. Therefore, a preemptive strike,
>> destroying the _Force de Frappe_ of France and the nuclear arms of
>> the United Kingdom may be possible.
>>
>> However, the UK may have some submarines with nuclear missiles, I seem
>> to vaguely recall. In which case, Putin may have to settle for _Festung
>> Europa_.
>
> More than a vague recall, the UK has four nuclear submarines armed with
> ICBMs (MIRVed warheads) and at least one is always at sea on patrol.
> (The others are in port having maintenance, or crew rotations, or
> training, but can put to sea in times of crisis).  One of the main tasks
> of RAF and Royal Navy surface patrols in the area is to keep Russian
> aircraft and ships away from the sea lanes around the Scottish base for
> NATO subs.

The UK has eleven nuclear powered submarines. Four of them are heavily
modified USA Tridents with 16 ICBM capability each. The other seven
are hunter-killers with torpedoes and cruise missiles. Four more
hunter-killers on on order.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Navy_Submarine_Service

BTW, Australia has just ordered several modified Trident submarines from
the USA.
https://www.dau.edu/library/defense-atl/blog/AUKUS-Submarine-Project

Lynn

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 2:34:14 PM UTC-6, Lynn McGuire wrote:

> That is probably those triple state chips: Yes, no, and maybe.

There certainly _could_ be quality issues, but I tend to
be cautious and avoid over-optimism.

Also, Russia is where the SETUN computer was invented;
it worked quite well, and was the world's first ternary
computer.

John Savard

On 3/15/2022 1:27 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
> We are now discussing computer architecture in rec.arts.sf.written and
> science fiction in comp.arch. What is the world coming to?
>
All DNS lead to Usenet.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 2:27:36 PM UTC-6, Thomas Koenig wrote:

> We are now discussing computer architecture in rec.arts.sf.written and
> science fiction in comp.arch. What is the world coming to?

And then there was my comment in reaction to your mention of garbage
collection...

John Savard

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 2:34:07 AM UTC+11, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 8:39:46 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>
> > Now, today, Russia can't take Ukraine without Chinese weapons. There's
> > no way it's going to take down Germany, even if the rest of NATO
> > doesn't kick in.
> Russia and China are both denying that China is selling Russia weapons
> for use in Ukraine. Captured Russian drones show that Russia is using a
> lot of imported chips in its weapons,

Does Russia even have chip manufacturers?
Also the war hasn't been going long enough for new orders of chips to have reached the front

The really interesting news is that Russia has allegedly asked China for MRE, and there are stories of MRE packets with expiry dates back over 5 years being used
If Russia is that stuffed up for logistics they're not in a position to fight a war for long.

> but if China did start making military
> sales to Russia for this war, *it* would start feeling the wrath of the
> United States, even if applying sanctions to China would be far more painful
> for the West than not trading with a largely irrelevant Russia.
>
> I was just watching a YouTube video on how Russia "couldn't survive" Western
> tech sanctions. I knew beforehand that China's domestic fabs can only make
> chips down to 14nm, which is behind the times, but not that terrible. The video
> noted that Russia's most advanced fab... can only make chips at 65nm.
>
> Oh, that means they're hopeless, right?
>
> A 3 GHz Core 2 Duo and a 2.67 GHz Core 2 Quad were made by Intel on a 65nm
> process. 65 nm is where Dennard scaling came to an end. Later process nodes let
> you put more on a single die, and let you make chips that used less energy...
> but 65nm is... adequate. It is possible to make do with that fairly nicely if one has to.
>
But can you slip one into modern military equipment?

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 7:58:51 AM UTC+11, Lynn McGuire wrote:

>
> BTW, Australia has just ordered several modified Trident submarines from
> the USA.
> https://www.dau.edu/library/defense-atl/blog/AUKUS-Submarine-Project
>
From what I've heard living in Australia we haven't ordered anything yet.
We've got a commitment from the UK & USA that we'll be able to buy some nuclear submarines of some sort in the future and should have them by 2040...

On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 04:58:24 -0700, Quadibloc wrote:

> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 1:59:21 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
>
>> Well, /my/ model calls for Putin to be deposed April 23-30. Between now
>> and then news headlines will shout about rising street protests inside
>> Russia against Putin. The number of those stories will increase
>> gradually, overtaking the number of stories about the invasion itself.
>> Pundits will call it "the new Russian Revolution."
>
> While a _palace_ coup is at least possible, for Putin to be brought down
> by a _popular_ revolution seems extremely unlikely.
>

Who will know? My model, if it proves out, also predicts that
the American press at least will /attribute/ Putin's fall to
the street protests, whether or not that is actually the case.

On 15/03/2022 23.15, Hamish Laws wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 7:58:51 AM UTC+11, Lynn McGuire wrote:

>> BTW, Australia has just ordered several modified Trident submarines from
>> the USA.
>> https://www.dau.edu/library/defense-atl/blog/AUKUS-Submarine-Project
>>
> From what I've heard living in Australia we haven't ordered anything yet.

I just read the linked article a couple of times without finding anything
about orders. It seems to be an assessment of a potential program.

--
Michael F. Stemper
This email is to be read by its intended recipient only. Any other party
reading is required by the EULA to send me $500.00.

On 2022-03-15 12:58 p.m., Quadibloc wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 11:36:47 AM UTC-6, David Johnston wrote:
>> If the United
>> States stands by and does nothing while an actual NATO member is
>> attacked then NATO and all of the United States's other alliances are
>> done and with them the United States's position as a superpower.
>
> That's true.
> But I suspect that it standing by and not doing all that much while
> Ukraine suffers what it is is hardly dong much good to the United
> States' position as a superpower.

Actually it is. A lot of nations have gotten a lot more interested in
joining NATO before Russia turns its attention to them.

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
>On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 09:16:45 +0000, Michael Dworetsky
><platinum198@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>>> Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia will be first.
>
>I would not be surprised if planning for such operations were being
>mdae now. The Baltic states after all do not have the ability to wage
>a defence in depth as Ukraine does.

I would be very surprised if such planning was underway. All three
countries have been NATO members for a decade or two.

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 9:34:27 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 12:00:03 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 12:17:18 PM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
> >> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 08:40:32 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> >> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> >It isn't Zelensky, it's Biden who "poked the bear" foolishly - by refusing Russia's
> >> >"security" demands without providing Ukraine with ironclad protection.
> >> What "security" demands were those?
> >
> >That Ukraine must never join NATO. Back around February 12, this stuff
> >was in the news.
> If Zelensky had agreed, Putin would only have come up with another
> "demand".
>
> You are confusing cause and effect. The situation is not:
>
> Zelensky poked the bear
>
> The situation is:
>
> the bear attacked Zelensky because it wanted to

Oh, I agree that the bear wasn't really poked.

If Putin can deter interference with his _aggression_
in Ukraine with his nuclear weapons, certainly he can
deter an invasion of Russia with his nuclear weapons.

Zelensky did nothing wrong in seeking ironclad
protection for his country, which had already been
invaded twice before.

But Biden did not _either_ give Russia a promise not to
let Ukraine in NATO _or_ give Ukraine absolute and ironclad
protection against future aggression from Russia - when he
was aware that such aggression was a real possibility.

I would have preferred the latter; that is, *before* Russia could
invade, before Putin could even open his mouth to make any
more threats, there is a solid line of U.S. forces guarding the
borders of Ukraine - so that the choice of triggering a nuclear
war would lie with Putin, not Biden. Therefore - no invasion.

So when Lynn says that Zelensky 'poked the bear', I have to
admit that if anyone did, it was perhaps Biden.

John Savard

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 9:49:19 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:

> Is that the deal that got the French upset a while back?

Yes.

John Savard

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> schrieb:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 09:16:45 +0000, Michael Dworetsky
><platinum198@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>>> Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia will be first.
>
> I would not be surprised if planning for such operations were being
> mdae now. The Baltic states after all do not have the ability to wage
> a defence in depth as Ukraine does.

They are NATO members. There are sizable contingents the other
NATO countries there, for example the Enhanded Forward Presence
in Lithuania, which is led by the German army.

> If the Russians reached into the Baltics to the extent they have in
> Ukraine they'd be halfway across the Baltic to Sweden by now.

I suspect they would have found the reaction to attacking a NATO
member supported by other NATO countries a bit more than what
Ukraine is able to put up.

On 3/16/2022 10:45 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 14:17:13 -0400, J. Clarke
> <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> It isn't Zelensky, it's Biden who "poked the bear" foolishly - by refusing Russia's
>>> "security" demands without providing Ukraine with ironclad protection.
>>
>> What "security" demands were those?
>
> Presumably he means accepting further Russian occupation of their
> territory in addition to de jure acceptance of the conquest of Crimea
> and eastern Ukraine plus strict limits on the size of the Ukrainian
> military which essentially means the end of Ukraine 5 minutes after
> Putin picks up the phone to his tank commanders telling them to gas up
> and to head for Kyev.
>
> Which is pretty much the "peace terms" Putin is offering right now.

Along with NATO agreeing to allow Russia veto power over what countries
can be offered membership....

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 12:47:45 PM UTC-6, Thomas Koenig wrote:

> I suspect they would have found the reaction to attacking a NATO
> member supported by other NATO countries a bit more than what
> Ukraine is able to put up.

Even if you're right, we're still screwed.

Either the United States not ignoring Russia's nuclear threat and
defending Ukraine to prevent massive civilian slaughter means that
it won't defend NATO countries either if Russia threatens nukes...
or it doesn't.

If it does, as I fear - Russia gets to conquer the world.

If it doesn't, as you say - Russia miscalculates, invades a NATO
country, and we're all fried.

That's why it was _essential_ not to allow matters to deteriorate
this far.

America is fed up with being the world's policeman? Sorry, the
world as it is doesn't give America a choice. Unless America
allows some other of its allies to pick up the torch, which it does
not: see the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and, for that matter, the
Suez Crisis.

John Savard

On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 6:37:37 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 23:38:09 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

> >America is fed up with being the world's policeman? Sorry, the
> >world as it is doesn't give America a choice. Unless America
> >allows some other of its allies to pick up the torch, which it does
> >not: see the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and, for that matter, the
> >Suez Crisis.

> You mean the non-proliferation treaty that kept India, Pakistan, South
> Africa, Israel, and North Korea from developing nuclear weapons?

No, the one that failed to keep them from doing that. Because the
countries that would need nuclear weapons in this case tend to be
more respectful of international law. But if they realize where their
vital interests lie, you could be right.

John Savard

On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 17:56:24 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

>The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
>>On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 09:16:45 +0000, Michael Dworetsky
>><platinum198@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia will be first.
>>
>>I would not be surprised if planning for such operations were being
>>mdae now. The Baltic states after all do not have the ability to wage
>>a defence in depth as Ukraine does.
>
>I would be very surprised if such planning was underway. All three
>countries have been NATO members for a decade or two.

I'd be surprised if such planning did NOT exist since armies do all
sorts of contingency planning. The US Army even has a zombie
apocalypse plan (though that was written as a staff exercise in
writing orders as opposed to a foe the US Army ever expected
to ever have to fight)
That said I agree with your conclusion.

On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 13:28:20 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>On 3/16/2022 10:45 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 14:17:13 -0400, J. Clarke
>> <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What "security" demands were those?
>>
>> Presumably he means accepting further Russian occupation of their
>> territory in addition to de jure acceptance of the conquest of Crimea
>> and eastern Ukraine plus strict limits on the size of the Ukrainian
>> military which essentially means the end of Ukraine 5 minutes after
>> Putin picks up the phone to his tank commanders telling them to gas up
>> and to head for Kyev.
>>
>> Which is pretty much the "peace terms" Putin is offering right now.
>
>Along with NATO agreeing to allow Russia veto power over what countries
>can be offered membership....

Yup. And given Putin is de facto a Chinese satellite right now you
know what THAT means!

On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 3:23:33 PM UTC-6, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 13:28:20 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
> <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> >On 3/16/2022 10:45 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> >> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 14:17:13 -0400, J. Clarke
> >> <jclarke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> What "security" demands were those?
> >>
> >> Presumably he means accepting further Russian occupation of their
> >> territory in addition to de jure acceptance of the conquest of Crimea
> >> and eastern Ukraine plus strict limits on the size of the Ukrainian
> >> military which essentially means the end of Ukraine 5 minutes after
> >> Putin picks up the phone to his tank commanders telling them to gas up
> >> and to head for Kyev.
> >>
> >> Which is pretty much the "peace terms" Putin is offering right now.
> >
> >Along with NATO agreeing to allow Russia veto power over what countries
> >can be offered membership....
> Yup. And given Putin is de facto a Chinese satellite right now you
> know what THAT means!

I thought that the geographical location of Taiwan was enough of an obstacle
to its membership in NATO...

John Savard