Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: antidemoncrat

“If I remember right, at one time Ukraine had nuclear weapons and the US and Russia talked them into giving them up “

No... that is the pop culture story. But Ukraine never had any. Some Soviet nukes, controlled by Moscow physically existed there when the USSR ended. But they were never owned, commanded or operated by Ukraine. They were removed rather than allowing them to get handed over to Kiev. Today is probably why.

The Ukrainian military never had a commander of nuclear forces. Kiev had zero operational control because they did not own them. And that security guarantee was for non-aligned military status.
But in any case, those agreements were dead when the nazi coup took over the Ukrainian government. The Uke government ended in violent over throw, and now a new one is there. They don’t inherit everything the old government had.


16 posted on 10/17/2024 9:45:11 AM PDT by DesertRhino (2016 Star Wars, 2020 The Empire Strikes Back, 2024... RETURN OF THE JEDI. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: DesertRhino
You are outdoing even yourself today. Ukraine had a lot of nuclear weapons, and the bombers and missiles to deliver them. That's why the USA entered into an agreement with them to disarm.

Trying to create a new history based on lies is something a Russian propagandist would do.

33 posted on 10/17/2024 11:12:56 AM PDT by freeandfreezing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: DesertRhino; marktwain

“”””Some Soviet nukes, controlled by Moscow physically existed there when the USSR ended. But they were never owned, commanded or operated by Ukraine. They were removed rather than allowing them to get handed over to Kiev. Today is probably why.
The Ukrainian military never had a commander of nuclear forces. Kiev had zero operational control because they did not own them. And that security guarantee was for non-aligned military status.””””

This guy at Reddit writes this, so it may be a little different than what you posted.
“Generally speaking, Belarus and Kazakhstan were more or less fine with de facto Russian control of nuclear weapons on their territory. Ukraine, less so. From late 1992, Ukraine had custodial control of nuclear warheads on its territory, and set up its own embryonic command and control system, as well as protocols to order military staff on its territory to not comply with launch orders that the Ukrainian President did not countersign. Ukrainian control went so far that in 1993 the Ukrainian military removed and transported warheads from missiles, inching closer to setting up its own active control of nuclear weapons. This confusing situation was only ultimately resolved by the December 5, 1994 Budapest Memorandum, under which Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan agreed to the transfer of all nuclear warheads to Russian territory, which was completed by 1996.”

“The nuclear arsenal that was on Ukrainian territory consisted of the following: 130 SS-19 and 46 SS-24 intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) with 1,240 warheads, and 44 Tupolev-95 and Tupolev-160 strategic bombers (with 1,081 nuclear cruise missiles). There apparently were still tactical nuclear warheads on Ukrainian territory as well - the USSR basically kept tactical nukes in local armories, and started relocating them to Russia proper in the last months of 1991. The last ones were out of Ukraine in early 1992. So the negotiations were always specifically around the strategic weapons and delivery systems.”
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/t06ckf/in_the_early_90s_ukraine_had_the_thirdlargest/?rdt=64487


64 posted on 10/17/2024 3:27:11 PM PDT by ansel12 ((NATO warrior under Reagan, and RA under Nixon, bemoaning the pro-Russians from Vietnam to Ukraine.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson