PTT推薦

Re: [分享] 學者Mearsheimer烏克蘭不應該放棄核武

看板Military標題Re: [分享] 學者Mearsheimer烏克蘭不應該放棄核武作者
always0410
(蘭嶼人)
時間推噓68 推:68 噓:0 →:31

上一篇不少推文說Mearsheimer是以大國的角度來看

看完這篇1993年的文,不知道還是不是一樣

文中寫道1991年烏俄的關係是不錯的

Mearsheimer能在二三十年烏俄關係不錯的背景

先預見現在歐美的態度,烏克蘭放棄核武的錯誤,俄國出兵理由

還是覺得很神





The case for a Ukrainian nuclear deterrent

烏克蘭的核武議題

https://reurl.cc/VjQxQR




Abstract

Conventional wisdom argues that Ukraine should be forced to give up its
nuclear weapons to ensure peace and stability in Europe. This is quite wrong.As soon as Ukraine declared its independence, Washington should have
encouraged Kiev to fashion its own secure nuclear deterrent. The dangers of
Russian-Ukrainian rivalry bode poorly for peace. If Ukraine is forced to
maintain a large conventional army to deter potential Russian expansion, the
danger of war is much greater than if it maintains a nuclear capability. US
policy should recognize that Ukraine, come what may, will keep its nuclear
weapons.

大綱

有些論點認為烏克蘭該放棄核武來確保在歐洲穩定與和平的發展,這個想法錯得離譜。作者認為烏克蘭獨立,美國應該要鼓勵烏克蘭建立他們的核武威攝能力,如果烏克蘭是以維持一個大型的傳統武裝部隊來防堵俄羅斯的擴張,風險會遠高於烏克蘭擁有核武的風險,美國應要讓烏克蘭保有自己的核武能力。







看得很快,如果有時態文義錯誤的地方還請見諒,僅節錄部分翻譯





WHO CONTROLS THE WEAPONS?

The breakup of the Soviet Union left Ukraine with almost 4,000
nuclear weapons on its territory. Ukrainian leaders emphasized
before and immediately after Ukraine declared its independence on
December 1, 1991, that Ukraine would transfer all of its nuclear
weapons to Russia by the end of 1994, sign the Nonproliferation
Treaty (npt) and live the life of a nonnuclear state.

蘇聯解體後,有約4000枚核武留在烏克蘭境內
(註: 其他網站資料顯示烏克蘭核武量曾經世界前3大,僅次美、蘇)
烏克蘭的領導人聲明在烏克蘭獨立之後烏克蘭會依據核武禁擴條約
把這些核武轉移到俄羅斯






WHO CONTROLS THE WEAPONS?

True to its word, Ukraine moved all of its tactical nuclear weapons
to Russia between January and May 1992. However, none of
Ukraine's 1,656 strategic nuclear weapons have been transferred to
Russia. That force, which is aimed at the United States but could be
programmed to strike Russia, includes 130 SS-19S (6 warheads each),
46 SS-24S (10 warheads each), and 30 Bear-H and Blackjack bombers
(together carrying 416 bombs), making a total of 1,656 nuclear
weapons.

在1992的1月到5月之間,烏克蘭把所有的戰「術」型核武(tactical nuclear weapon)轉移到俄羅斯。但是,烏克蘭所有的1656枚戰「略」型核武(strategic nuclear weapon),卻沒有一個移轉到到俄羅斯。這些核武,是用來針對美國的,但也可以用來打擊俄國。

後面都是在辯證烏克蘭跟俄到底誰才能真正掌握這些核武的國家我就不貼上來了
總之作者認為,證據顯示烏克蘭才是實際掌控這些核武的國家






WHY RUSSIAN-UKRAINIAN PEACE IS IMPORTANT

A war between Russia and Ukraine would be a disaster. Great power wars are
very costly and dangerous, causing massive loss of life and worldwide
turmoil, and possibly spreading to involve other countries. The likely resultof that war-Russia's reconquest of Ukraine -would injure prospects for peace
throughout Europe. It would increase the danger of a Russian-German
collision, and sharply intensify the security competition across the
continent.

烏克蘭跟俄羅斯的戰爭會是場災難,大國間的戰爭將造成許多生命的消逝還有世界的動盪,甚至把戰爭的影響擴散到其他國家,既危險且成本高昂。
可能的結果是俄羅斯將再次奪回烏克蘭,破壞整個歐洲的和平前景,這將增加俄德衝突的危險,並加劇歐洲大陸的軍事競爭。

A conventional war between Russia and Ukraine would entail vast military
casualties and the possible murder of many thousands of civilians. Russians
and Ukrainians have a history of mutual enmity; this hostility, combined withthe intermixing of their populations, raises the possibility that war betweenthem could entail Bosnian style ethnic cleansing and mass murder. This war
could produce millions of refugees clamoring at the borders of Western
Europe.

俄羅斯和烏克蘭之間的傳統戰爭將導致大量軍事人員的傷亡,導致數千名平民遭受殺害。烏克蘭和俄羅斯人一直以來對彼此互有敵意,這些敵意加上種族混合的人口,可能會導致波士尼亞式的種族清洗與大規模屠殺。這場戰爭還可能導致西歐邊界出現數百萬的難民。

In addition, there are 14 operational nuclear reactors in Ukraine that might
produce new Chernobyls if left unattended or attacked during a conventional
war. The consequences of such a war would dwarf the death and suffering in
the Balkans, where more than 50,000 people have died since the summer of
1991. Needless to say, if nuclear weapons were used the costs would be
immeasurable.

更甚者,烏克蘭境內有14座核反應爐,如果無人看管或遭受攻擊,可能會出現新的車諾比事件,如果真的發生上述的悲劇,巴爾幹半島在1991年的內戰衝突來對比烏俄衝突的災難,可能就不算什麼了。更不用說,如果烏俄衝突使用上了核武,這些代價更難以估計。

There is also the threat of escalation beyond the borders of Russia and
Ukraine. For example, the Russians might decide to reconquer other parts of
the former Soviet Union in the midst of a war, or might try to take back someof Eastern Europe. Poland and Belarus might join forces with Russia against
Ukraine or gang up with Ukraine to prevent a Russian resurgence. The Germans,Americans or Chinese could get pulled in by their fear of a Russian victory.
(Doubters should remember that the United States had no intention of fightingin Europe when war broke out in 1914 and again in 1939.) Finally, nuclear
weapons might be used accidentally or purposefully against a third state.

除此之外,烏俄邊界以外還有其他可能的威脅,舉例來說俄羅斯可能會意淫並想要再次對部分東歐壞壞,波蘭跟白俄羅斯可能會加入俄羅斯的行列或者聯合烏克蘭一起抵禦俄羅斯。德、美、中可能會因為對俄羅斯勝利的恐懼而捲入戰局(懷疑者應該要回想美國”宣布
中立”在1914、1939年戰爭爆發一開始是沒有意願在歐洲作戰的,最後還不是乖乖來了)
,最終,核子武器可能會有意或無意地用在第三國。

註:美國最近在北約增派人手了

The security environment in Europe would certainly become heated and
competitive in the wake of a Russian war with Ukraine. Other great powers
would move quickly and sharply to contain further Russian expansion. The
Russians would then think seriously- for security reasons-about controlling
their many smaller neighbors. Other great powers would move to check them.

在烏俄戰爭之後,歐洲的環境將會產生激烈的變化。其他的大國將會採取措施來防堵俄羅斯的擴張,屆時俄羅斯會認真思考來控制其他鄰居小國,其他的國家也會採取因應措施。

One might expect the burden of deterring a resurgent Russia to fall to an
American-dominated nato, in effect, bringing back the Cold War order that
kept Europe at peace for 45 years. That outcome is not likely, however, for anumber of reasons. The United States is reducing force levels in Europe
significantly, which will cause it to lose much of its leverage on the
continent. Even if Russia behaves aggressively, U.S. troops are not likely toreturn to Europe in large numbers, mainly because the Germans are capable of
bearing most of the burden of checking the Russians. The Germans are
well-located geographically to counter Russian expansion, and they are strongenough to do so. Germany not only has a powerful economy, but its population
has just increased by almost 20 million. Russia, even with the conquest of
Ukraine, would probably be markedly less powerful than the former Soviet
Union.

可能會有人認為以美國為首的北約組織會負責遏止俄羅斯的工作,實際上並不是這樣,因為許多原因,美國正大幅從歐洲減少軍事部屬,這將會削減美國在歐洲的影響力。即使俄國的行為極具侵略性,美國的軍事佈署也沒有要重返歐洲的跡象,主要的原因是德國具有能力承擔主防俄羅斯的工作。德國好山好水(戰略位置),國力也足夠強能讓它們對抗俄國。德國不只擁有強勁的經濟體系,人口也剛達到2000萬人。俄羅斯即便征服了烏克蘭,可能也不如之前的蘇聯強大。

A multipolar Europe with a German-Russian security competition at its core
might be inevitable, regardless of Ukraine's fate. Germany and Russia will
probably be the two most powerful states in post-Cold War Europe.
Nevertheless, an independent Ukraine dampens that competition because it is aformidable barrier between Russia and Germany. Remove that key buffer,
however, and the borders of the two most powerful states on the continent
would be much closer to each other, with the territory in between occupied byweak states. An intense political rivalry focused on this new buffer zone
would probably result.

若無視烏克蘭的命運,德俄的軍事競爭將很難避免。德俄將可能分別是冷戰後最強大的歐洲國家。獨立的烏克蘭有助於穩定歐洲大陸的情勢,因為烏克蘭成為強大的屏障,阻隔了俄國與德國。如果消除了這個關鍵的緩衝,其他弱國的領土會被吞食,這兩個強大的國家會更近距離的接觸,在新的緩衝區更為激烈的政治衝突就可能發生。







WHY THE ALTERNATIVES WILL NOT WORK

To deter Russian aggression in a future crisis, Ukraine might consider
developing a conventional deterrent, or asking the West to extend it a
security guarantee. These alternatives, however, are not feasible.

為防堵未來俄羅斯可能的侵略,烏克蘭可能會考慮發展傳統武力,或者要求西方為其提供安全保障,但是這些方案都是不可行的。

A Ukrainian conventional deterrent is not a viable option because Ukraine
cannot build an army powerful enough to stop a Russian attack. Ukraine's armymight put up dogged resistance, but it would eventually be defeated. Russia
is simply too powerful. The best indicators of latent military
power-population, gross national product, industrial output-show Russia to beabout three times more powerful than Ukraine. Even if Ukraine had a stalwart
conventional deterrent, a nuclear-free Ukraine would still be vulnerable to
Russian nuclear blackmail.

烏克蘭的軍事武力不是一個可行的選項,因為烏克蘭沒有辦法打造一支足以抵禦俄羅斯攻擊的軍隊,就算烏克蘭的軍隊會頑強的抵抗,但是最終還是會被俄羅斯擊敗,原因無他,因為俄羅斯的軍事實力實在太強了。即使烏克蘭擁有強大的傳統軍事力量,沒有核威攝能力的烏克蘭仍容易受到俄羅斯的核武威脅。

Finally, Ukraine would have to ruthlessly extract resources from its society
if it tried to compete with its bigger neighbor at the conventional level.
Conventional military power is significantly more expensive than nuclear
military power and requires a larger military; hence it requires far more
popular mobilization. Reliance on conventional forces would therefore tempt
Ukrainian leaders to portray the Russian threat in the worst possible light
and fan the flames of nationalism, which could heighten friction between
Ukrainians and the large Russian population living in Ukraine. This
development would upset the Russians and push them to consider military
intervention to protect their fellow Russians.

如果烏克蘭想要跟他旁邊的大鄰居競爭,烏克蘭更要從底層社會無情的搾取資源。尤其傳統的軍事武力發展,成本遠高於核武,亦需要更大規模的部隊,因此烏克蘭也需要更多的人口動員。另外,對傳統武力的依賴會使烏克蘭領導人試圖煽動民族主義的火焰,以最糟糕的方式來描述俄羅斯的威脅,這可能會加劇烏克蘭人和居住在烏克蘭境內俄羅斯人之間的摩擦。這樣的發展將使俄羅斯人感到不安,並促使他們考慮進行軍事干預以保護他們的同胞。

A security guarantee from the West is theoretically possible but not a
practical strategy for maintaining Ukrainian sovereignty. Extending
deterrence to Germany during the Cold War was a demanding and expensive job;
extending deterrence further east to Ukraine would be even more difficult.
Neither America nor its European allies are eager to take on an expensive newcommitment; on the contrary, natos power is shrinking rapidly. Political willaside, extending nato's security umbrella into the heart of the old Soviet
Union is not wise. It is sure to enrage the Russians and cause them to act
belligerently.

來自西方的安全保證僅是一個可能的理論,但對於保護烏克蘭主權則不是務實的策略。將北約的保護傘延伸到舊蘇聯的心臟是不明智的,肯定會激怒俄羅斯人,最終導致他們以戰爭行動來解決。







NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARE THE ANSWER

Vilifying nuclear weapons is a fashionable sport in the West. Many believe
they are a major source of tension between states and that their deterrent
value is quite limited. Given these beliefs and the horrible consequences of
nuclear war, it is hardly surprising that many people want to rid the world
of these weapons.

批評核子武器在西方是一種政治時尚,他們認為核武是國與國之間主要的緊張來源,但是威攝效果卻是有限的(我猜是因為不能動不動拿核武出來談判),根據這些想法以及核武可能帶來的可怕後果,多數人們想要讓世界擺脫核武這樣的武器也就不太讓人意外了。

This view of nuclear weapons is simplistic and flies in the face of the
inherent logic of nuclear deterrence, as well as the history of the Cold War.In fact, nuclear weapons often diminish international violence, and Ukrainiannuclear weapons would be an effective deterrent against a Russian
conventional attack or nuclear blackmail.

上面對於核武的觀點過於簡單,而且與核威攝的內涵及冷戰的歷史殷鑑背道而馳。***(接下來這段話在衛道人士眼裡可能會有些離經叛道)***核武可消除國際一些暴力衝突,而烏克蘭的核武可以有效的威攝俄羅斯傳統軍事武力或者核武的威脅。

註:因為作者信奉的是國際現實主義,下面會作者意圖實證在沒有至高無上的國際強權出 現之前的戰爭與殺戮,反致生靈塗炭;核武出現之後,有相對(兩極或多極)的國際強權
,形成恐怖平衡,讓局勢逐漸穩定,世界步入和平。

In the pre-nuclear world of industrialized great powers, there were two worldwars between 1900 and 1945 in which some 50 million Europeans died. In the
nuclear age, the story is very different. Only some 15,000 Europeans were
killed in minor wars between 1945 and 1990, and there was a stable peace
between the superpowers that became increasingly robust over time. A
principal cause of this "long peace" was nuclear weapons.

在核武還沒有出現的世界前,在1900-1945年之間有兩次世界大戰,造成約5000萬歐洲人死亡。

核武元年以後,這個世界變得更美好了XD,在1945年-1990年之間,歐洲只有零星的戰爭,比起過去,現在僅約15000歐洲人死亡。

Nuclear weapons are a powerful force for peace because they are weapons of
mass destruction. They create the possibility that in a war both sides will
cease to exist as functioning societies. This catastrophic threat will
foreclose any Russian thoughts of aggression against Ukraine, since a
defeated Ukraine could well use its nuclear weapons against Russia before
going under. Defeat for Ukraine at the hands of the Russians would mean loss
of sovereignty, and history makes clear that states will pay very high costs
to maintain it. Hence an aggressive Russia could not dismiss the Ukrainian
nuclear threat. Moreover, there is always the possibility that nuclear
weapons might be used inadvertently or accidentally in the course of a
conventional war, which provides further incentives for caution.

核武對於和平有重要的力量是因為核武是大規模毀滅性武器,如果雙方使用核武開戰,雙方都有可能無法再正常運作。因為核武足夠災難,所以可以使俄羅斯屏除一切對烏克蘭壞壞的想法。尤其如果假設烏俄開戰,烏克蘭被打矇了,烏克蘭還是可以使用核武來對抗俄羅斯。也因此,俄國不能忽略烏克蘭的核武威脅,尤其核武可能會有意或無意的在傳統戰爭中出現,那使得兩個少年哥要衝突更需要謹慎小心。

There is a second reason to favor a Ukrainian nuclear deterrent: it is
inevitable. Ukraine is likely to keep its nuclear weapons, regardless of whatother states say and do. American opposition would raise the risk of war
between Russia and Ukraine.

第二個支持烏克蘭繼續持有核武威脅的理由是: 不可避免的,如果烏克蘭未持有核武威脅,將會增加烏俄開戰的風險。

Ukraine has suffered greatly at the hands of outside occupiers. After
Stalin's murder of 12 million in the 1930s, the Germans killed another 7
million Ukrainians during World War II. This dark history, plus a Russian
threat next door and the absence of outsiders willing to deter that threat,
makes it unlikely that Ukraine would give up its nuclear weapons. Reflecting
this reality, pronuclear sentiment is already growing rapidly in Ukraine.
America and its allies may complain about Ukraine's new posture, but they
would not have to live with the consequences of a Russian attack if
deterrence fails.

有鑑於烏克蘭慘痛、被蹂躪的歷史(1930年代,史達林殺了1200萬人;二戰,德國殺了700萬人),以及現實生活中,住在旁邊的壞鄰居鵝國,烏克蘭境內對持有核武議題的情緒會迅速增長。換言之,如果烏克蘭能持有核武,歐美雖然可能會不適應(擔心演變成親俄、獨裁之類的走向)烏克蘭的新角色,但是歐美的好處是不用直接面對鵝國人。

Once the Russians learn that Ukraine is keeping its nuclear arsenal, they
will doubtless consider launching a preventive war to eliminate it before it
becomes fully operational. But this is an unattractive military option. It
would be a difficult task with conventional means, since Ukraine inherited
substantial conventional forces from the Soviet military, which would enable
it to put up formidable resistance. The Russians might launch a nuclear
strike against the Ukrainian arsenal. The probability of Ukrainian nuclear
retaliation would be small, but the Russians could never be sure that Ukrainewould not launch some nuclear weapons back at them, causing cataclysmic
damage, even if the retaliation was ragged. Also, radioactive fallout from anattack on Ukraine would contaminate Russia as well.

這邊簡單來說就是假設烏克蘭續擁核後,俄羅斯跟美歐各自可能的棋弈,沒什麼就不寫了。


Thus military calculations alone should suffice to deter the Russians from
launching a preventive war. Nevertheless, it is important that every element
in the deterrent equation work to prevent war from breaking out. Strong
American and European resistance to Ukraine's decision to be a nuclear state
is likely to isolate Ukraine diplomatically and weaken deterrence.

要達成均衡的威攝,每個因素都很重要,才能預防戰爭的發生。如果烏克蘭決定擁核,強悍的歐美可能會決定孤立烏克蘭並削減烏克蘭的威攝能力。









IT IS STILL NOT TOO LATE

The United States should have begun working immediately after the Soviet
Union collapsed to quickly and smoothly make Ukraine a nuclear power. In factWashington rejected this approach and adopted the opposite policy, which
remains firmly in place. Nevertheless, it is wrongheaded, and despite the
sunk costs and the difficulty of reversing field in the policy world, the
Clinton administration should make a gradual but unmistakable about-face.

在蘇聯垮台後,美國應該協助烏克蘭成為核武國,但是白宮拒絕了這樣的做法,並且採取了相反的措施,而且還很堅定要把烏克蘭去核武化。儘管政治決策逆轉是非常困難以及沉默成本等現實,柯林頓政府還是應該要迷途知返。




--

※ PTT留言評論
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 218.35.160.207 (臺灣)
PTT 網址

wadeawp 03/06 13:34先推 看到最後一段真的只能說先知

※ 編輯: always0410 (218.35.160.207 臺灣), 03/06/2022 13:35:32

a000000000 03/06 13:35老實說跟本馬後炮 烏有核武誰知道會不會變北韓

1993年的馬後炮? ※ 編輯: always0410 (218.35.160.207 臺灣), 03/06/2022 13:36:25

VANNN 03/06 13:36這是倒果為因,,烏以前頗為親俄吧,,若變為白俄羅斯這

Chhtaiwan 03/06 13:36strategic nuclear weapon那邊是戰略型

※ 編輯: always0410 (218.35.160.207 臺灣), 03/06/2022 13:37:06

VANNN 03/06 13:37種國家,,先廢掉核子武器是合理的

a186361 03/06 13:371993年當時還是親俄欸

fuhrershih 03/06 13:37其實以當時歐美政權的氛圍,能解除核武才是上上策

creative 03/06 13:37同意馬後炮,更遑論才不久約10年前親俄跟親歐才55波

st89702 03/06 13:37如果現在烏克蘭還是親俄的主政怎麼知道不是生出一

dalyadam 03/06 13:37其實真的倒果為因 烏克蘭是這10多年才慢慢靠向歐洲

st89702 03/06 13:37個有核武的盧卡申科?

frozenmoon 03/06 13:38那邊歐洲糧倉,別有核武比較妥當,且養護超級燒錢

vicklin 03/06 13:38養不起來無解

boringuy 03/06 13:39完全轉向親歐也是克里米亞危機之後

st89702 03/06 13:39而且烏如果保有核武就不太可能跟歐洲親近 只是單純

st89702 03/06 13:39馬後炮而已

curlymonkey 03/06 13:39可是俄軍看起來不太妙了

fuhrershih 03/06 13:39沒有人可以預期廿年後的情形,但是核武威脅是在眼前

VANNN 03/06 13:40有核武 你認為俄國會放烏克蘭脫離掌握近30年嗎...囧

roy2142 03/06 13:40都說柯林頓政府了

a186361 03/06 13:40而且以烏克蘭軍隊2014年以前的尿性養得起核武嗎

BalaBalaDaBa03/06 13:40現在德俄一個變成鋼盔搞笑國 一個被人看破手腳

a000000000 03/06 13:40我不是說作者馬後炮 我是說現在講烏克蘭核武

saviora 03/06 13:40如果烏克蘭有核武 俄國一定會更想把他傀儡化

same60710 03/06 13:40我也覺得倒果為因 如果現在烏變成白俄那歐美直接再

BDrip 03/06 13:41在說現在把這篇文拿出來講是馬後炮吧

st89702 03/06 13:42以烏克蘭經濟養傳統武力都很吃力了 只會比2014時軍

LeobenYK 03/06 13:42其實中間也有些預估錯誤了 譬如德俄關係

st89702 03/06 13:42備更慘

fuhrershih 03/06 13:42對全世界而言,能少一個擁核國就儘量少一個

good5755 03/06 13:42北韓:

same60710 03/06 13:43多一個超大威脅

DAEVA 03/06 13:43台灣也是

intela03252 03/06 13:43擁有核武的成本不只是維持機械運作,還有政

jamie81416 03/06 13:44若無核武,現在WW3保證馬上打起來

munchlax 03/06 13:44你沒辦法保證它不會丟西歐,所以只能拔掉它啊

tsgd 03/06 13:4430年前蘇聯解體中 俄系兄弟每個都窮到爆 養核武?

jamie81416 03/06 13:45核武本身是大規模殺傷武器,卻造就歷史上罕見的

jamie81416 03/06 13:45和平期真是個諷刺

NewCop 03/06 13:45烏有核武,歐俄兩方都會先逼他交出來,不交就是北

good5755 03/06 13:46冷戰期間還是有很多戰爭啊 只是沒發生在歐美而已

NewCop 03/06 13:46韓2.0

utadahikaru 03/06 13:46德俄軍備競賽xd

s8018572 03/06 13:47捧德國那段有得 看現在不太符合吧

sinon17 03/06 13:47經此一戰,北韓是永遠不會放棄核武的

intela03252 03/06 13:47看起來烏克蘭好像有選擇,說不定其實根本是沒得選

tsgd 03/06 13:48那時候交出核武的俄系兄弟有烏克蘭 哈薩克

NewCop 03/06 13:48你要謝天謝地現在烏克蘭沒核武,不然不管烏克蘭倒向

NewCop 03/06 13:48那一邊,北約跟俄國兩大核武勢力都會直接衝突

chordate 03/06 13:49他說德俄會軍備競賽結果有嗎...

s8018572 03/06 13:49現實主義者care歐洲人死多少幹嘛 不是

s8018572 03/06 13:49強權爽就好?

Khatru 03/06 13:49沒錢、沒技術,怎麼養

Brusolo 03/06 13:4930年前的文章,根本先知文,而先知總是孤獨

snoopy5566 03/06 13:50他對德國的預測完全錯誤

chordate 03/06 13:51我不覺得這篇哪裡先知了,除了俄侵烏幾乎全錯

gunng 03/06 13:52烏那時還是親俄立場 要白宮去扶植烏核武?

saviora 03/06 13:53有核武的話 只要烏親歐的瞬間 俄國就會馬上開扁

l81311i 03/06 13:53不把烏無核化 凱吉兄能幫非洲軍閥搞到核彈你信不信

Howard61313 03/06 13:53上篇我不知他說烏克蘭中立的資本在哪 原來是核武?

tsgd 03/06 13:53武器保養要錢 核武就更貴了 沒錢講什麼幹話 還先知?

他內文有寫喔

VANNN 03/06 13:54不覺的是 先知+1 最好是能預期30年後會有一場俄侵略

他在2014、2015都有呼籲俄國會對烏克蘭開戰不算先知? 在2月中多少PTT文保證絕對不會開打?

Ceelo 03/06 13:54你知道核武維護非常昂貴ㄟ

他內文有寫 1.西方協助 2.比養傳統軍備便宜 3.至於親俄只是可能性之一,烏克蘭跟俄在蘇聯往解也是有不少民族摩擦 4.當時他就覺得烏俄會有衝突而不是親俄 ※ 編輯: always0410 (218.35.160.207 臺灣), 03/06/2022 13:58:53

gunng 03/06 13:55你真扶下去 當年就會開始打今年的仗了

snoopy5566 03/06 13:55航母都養不起要賣人了 養得起核武嗎?

kuma660224 03/06 13:56別說航母核武 他們戰機都養不好

liu02112 03/06 13:56烏克蘭當時一窮二白 也沒有發射技術 核武維持費又貴

Ceelo 03/06 13:56英法核潛艦隊占海軍多少預算ㄇ

kuma660224 03/06 13:57沒有投射能力 就頂多本土自爆

LinChinHoung03/06 13:57烏克蘭gdp只有台灣1/4不到... 哪來的錢養核武

kuma660224 03/06 13:57那跟主動讓核電廠爆炸 效果也差不多

ufo559 03/06 13:57親西方也這幾年的事而 不然現在主戰場大概是波波

seraph01 03/06 13:57如果擁有核武今天立場可能還是親俄

chouvincent 03/06 13:58類似論點可以找到不少 就跟股票一樣......

GavinBelson 03/06 13:58正確的寫法是威懾還是威攝啊 還是沒差?

kuma660224 03/06 13:58但烏克蘭顯然不願讓核電廠出事一起死

leopard2 03/06 13:58德國人口有八千萬吧

jyekid 03/06 13:591993的文

kuma660224 03/06 13:59也就間接證明光有少量核武沒用

liu02112 03/06 13:59拖到最後只會變核武大潤發 誰拿錢去都能拎核彈回家

Chhtaiwan 03/06 14:00烏克蘭當時的核武是蘇聯體系下部屬和養護 多方協養

shadow0326 03/06 14:01不是烏克蘭當初放棄核武錯了 而是當初大國不支持烏

mimimoumou 03/06 14:01烏克蘭有核武,俄羅斯搞不好早就把烏克蘭變傀儡了

VANNN 03/06 14:01記得有報導,,蘇俄解體後 一百多顆核子武器不知所踪

mmmimi11tw 03/06 14:01是威懾,威勢使對方恐懼屈服

ARCHER2234 03/06 14:02當初他太親俄,西方不會幫他養核武的

kji590929 03/06 14:02德國:

good5755 03/06 14:03這篇的理論要建立在烏克蘭是親歐的前提 不然核武會

frozenmoon 03/06 14:03而且烏克蘭的核武不處理掉,當初要獨立也是很困難

VANNN 03/06 14:04如果現在還是 盧卡申科 當總統 這篇就會被說神棍吧

Chhtaiwan 03/06 14:04引發政經矛盾(一定會有條件要求)的機會其實也不小

ARCHER2234 03/06 14:05預測的很好,但核武問題對中型國來說無解

good5755 03/06 14:05變成俄國的武器 2014以前烏克蘭還是親俄派佔上風

Chhtaiwan 03/06 14:05就連美國要更新自己核武庫現代化都有點吃力了

meredith001 03/06 14:06這太馬後炮 1990東西德才剛合併 93捷克波蘭匈牙利

xiyephoto 03/06 14:06問題剛分家時可沒那麼親歐美

meredith001 03/06 14:07立陶宛那一票東歐前蘇聯國都還沒加入北約 更別說烏

good5755 03/06 14:08而且照他理論阿富汗有核武就能維持穩定嗎 真D馬後砲

meredith001 03/06 14:09克蘭是到2014才開始反俄拉鋸到今年