• A US Navy nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine surfaced in the Norwegian Sea.
  • It was accompanied by a guided-missile cruiser and two naval aircraft.
  • The show of force came weeks after Russia sent a submarine and naval fleet to Cuba.
  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Knowing they’re there and seeing they’re there are very different things. Don’t dismiss the psychological value of the latter.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      And don’t dismiss that they’d kill to know the location of a SSBN at any time under normal conditions.

      Like, I don’t know how high of a federal clearance you e ever gotten, but literally everything about a SSBNs schedule is at least secret. The people on them don’t even know where they are 99% of the time.

      Russia isn’t shooting down a nuke anyways, it doesn’t matter where it’s coming from, it’s hitting what it’s aimed.

      It’s literally an intercontinental ballistic missile…

      https://www.salon.com/2022/03/03/why-scientists-still-cant-figure-out-how-to-intercept-icbms/

      America isn’t even confident we could shoot one of NK’s down. We could launch from a SSBN literally on the other side of the planet and absolutely nothing would stop it from hitting Moscow.

      We gave up valuable intelligence for literally zero reason.

      It shows that we’re irrational for doing it. Or even worse, that we thought Russia is so irrational that they needed to see it. Making both of us irrational.

      The entire reason SSBNs are the threat they are, is you can only beat a ICBM by taking it out before it launches, and no one has a clue where the SSBNs are.

      When were acting rational and want a show of force. We park an LHD or even Aircraft Carrier squadron off a coast.

      Edit:

      Like, if Russia happened to have sonar going in that area, and they just saw it surface…

      They can compare sound signatures of that time period and may possibly isolate the distinctive sound of a SSBN. Something they’ve been trying to find for decades and could possibly lead to them being able to find SSBNs out in the wild.

      This is a god awful decision that has potentially huge ramifications…

      I get people wouldn’t know about all of this, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a big deal.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          There’s a lot of noise around a harbour, and unlikely to be opposition right outside.

          Completely different than middle of the ocean.

          • eggymachus@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            I don’t know… admittedly, I only remember some vague bits from Tom Clancy novels, but didn’t Soviet attack subs wait outside the home ports for the SSBNs to try to stay on their tail, and they never managed to?

            I should dig up The Hunt for Red October, I guess, but given current geopolitics maybe Red Storm Rising is a better fit :)

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              but didn’t Soviet attack subs wait outside the home ports for the SSBNs to try to stay on their tail, and they never managed to?

              I wouldn’t be surprised.

              But I know one of the most classified parts of a sub, is what the propeller looks like. Because then you could determine what it sounds like.

              Knowing one was at X location at Y time is dangerous because then recordings can be compared to other periods and if anything stands out…

              Then you can search for that.

              It’s just a whole lot of risk in area we go thru ridiculous pains to minimize any risk, for no legit payoff.

              There’s just no logic behind this move or rationalization of it.

      • Carrolade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        While I agree with the broad strokes of what you’re saying, we do have enough intelligence penetration into the Russian military to predict an invasion even their own soldiers did not know about. We could potentially find out where their listening stations are. One would have to be very nearby.

        Also, we have multiple subs. Revealing one temporarily does not compromise our deterrence. Nor is this move without any value, I think it’s important that we occasionally sabre-rattle back at them. It seems to be a language they understand.

        All that said, I doubt nuclear WW3 is around the corner with MAD still being the case. I doubt non-nuclear WW3 is around the corner unless China joins Russia in a military alliance. What I do think is within the next few years is chipping away at the Russian economy and morale of the populace until they sue for peace in Ukraine.

        • MorrisonMotel6@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Also, we have multiple subs. Revealing one temporarily does not compromise our deterrence

          I think what the person you’re replying to meant was something like:

          “These subs are known to exist by Russia, and their particular sound signatures may NOT be known to Russia. So, having one appear in a known location, Russia may now be able to link sounds previously unknown to them to this type of sound. With this new information, Russia may now be able to locate these types of subs, when that was previously not possible.”

          I’m not sure if they’re right about this or not, so the issue may be moot if Russia already had this information. I do, based on my military experience, generally tend to agree about the OPSEC component of their statement though.