Hacker News

points by varjag 1 day ago | 0 comments

A unique accumulation of workers (‘colony’) of the wood ant Formica polyctena Först., trapped within an old bunker for storing nuclear weapons, is described. The source of the ‘colony’ is a large colony nesting outdoors, on top of the bunker. Individuals that have fallen down through a ventilation pipe are not able to find their way back to the mother nest.

The dictatorship of proletariat but for ants, and inside a Soviet bunker of course. Sometimes I see why people find the idea that there's no God incredulous.

[–] quibono 1 day ago

> Two underground two-level ammunition bunkers, 300 metres apart (26 m × 42 m each), which constituted the core of the base and where nuclear weapons were kept, have survived (Sadowski 2011, Rutko 2015).

Interestingly this is a "Soviet" bunker in western Poland. A Warsaw Pact bunker?

Also, I didn't think that Soviet policy was to store nuclear weapons in Poland - not sure if this quote is accurate or if this was just more common than I had thought?

[–] m4rtink 1 day ago

It was likely similar to the warhead storage bunkers in Czech Republic (or Czechoslovaki back then), most likely intended for tactical nuclear weapons, like Scuds or maybe for aircraft as well:

https://www.expats.cz/czech-news/article/top-secret-cold-war...

https://www.rferl.org/a/24993733.html

https://www.euronews.com/2021/07/18/czech-cold-war-depot-for...

Of course the Soviets (who were exclusively running and guarding those bunkers back then) never confirmed what they were used to or if they contained live nuclear weapons. But it is clear that this was the intended use case, given the storage conditions, the expens to build & run those as well as how heavily they were guarded.

[–] ahoka 1 day ago

Same in Hungary: https://worldwidepanorama.org/wwp1208/BanfalvyZoltan-5060.ht...

"This is a special storage facility, type Granit 2 (or 3), designed for A-bombs."

Not sure if it's true, but the article says these nukes were meant for Italy.

[–] quibono 1 day ago

I find these bunkers fascinating. I've always wanted to explore one.

Amazing how much money was wasted on these only to be staffed for years and then abandoned.

[–] t-3 1 day ago

Successful military spending always appears to be "wasted" if you think the point is to use weapons. War means that your defense strategy has failed, peace means that it has succeeded. Never having to use what was stored in those bunkers means that they served their purpose.

[–] dripdry45 1 day ago

By this logic people can justify almost anything. I can say that we should’ve sent dinosaur clones to the moon because otherwise something bad is going to happen. Then we send the dinosaurs to the moon and nothing bad happens, and it justifies the action.

It’s the same insanity gun owners use justifying bringing weapons everywhere they go.

I simply don’t buy the argument, though I do see your point about deterrence

[–] bell-cot 1 day ago

Might you have heard the old saw "Any idiot can build a bridge that stands, but it takes an engineer to build a bridge that barely stands"?

Military spending is similar - you want security at the minimum cost.

Unfortunately, military conflicts (real and potential) have vastly more complexity and uncertainty than the gravity, wind, traffic loads, etc. that a bridge has to withstand. And even a nation's best experts (generally its senior military officers) generally have motives at odds with minimum-cost security for their nation.

[–] wffurr 1 day ago

Si vis pacem para bellum.

[–] shilgapira 1 day ago

No snark intended, but if you see his point then you do seem to buy his argument

[–] genxy 1 day ago

I have a rock that cures cancer.

[–] varjag 1 day ago

People think of Warsaw Pact as an alliance akin to NATO but opposite. In reality it was essentially Soviet Army padded with national units of subjugated countries. For instance there is NATO HQ as everyone knows but Warsaw Pact headquarters never existed: the chain of command started in Ministry of Defense in Moscow.

And yes tactical nukes were forward deployed to most Pact countries.

[–] frrlpp 13 hours ago

People think of NATO as an alliance akin to NATO but opposite. In reality it was essentially US Army padded with national units of subjugated countries. For instance there is NATO HQ as everyone knows but the chain of command started in Washington.

[–] varjag 11 hours ago

Literally no country was forced into NATO. Quite the opposite, the eastward members were banging the door to get in and were admitted only because no-one in the West could fathom aggressive Russia again. Warsaw Pact in contrast bided its time invading its members who tried to get out.

[–] Viliam1234 10 hours ago

> Warsaw Pact in contrast bided its time invading its members who tried to get out.

That's the irony -- the only countries Warsaw Pact members were invaded by were other Warsaw Pact members. (Too bad they couldn't call other Warsaw Pact members to protect them.)

[–] Viliam1234 10 hours ago

You probably think you're being either smart or funny, but you are neither.

NATO and Warsaw Pact are not some kind of mirror opposite (except for being enemies in the cold war). Countries join NATO voluntarily, for example Sweden and Finland recently. Countries have joined Warsaw Pact by being occupied by the Soviet Army.

> US Army padded with national units of subjugated countries

Please go ahead and explain how USA has subjugated Sweden and Finland recently, after failing to subjugate them during the previous decades.

[–] sandworm101 1 day ago

By "nuclear weapon" most people think of a bomb, but it can also mean the non-bomb portions of nuclear delivery systems such as rocket/missile bodies and aircraft. In times of rising conflict they could "forward-deploy" the warheads from Russia to be mated to rockets and such already in the field. So the peacetime "no nukes in Poland" policy can be true even though "nuclear weapons" were already waiting in bunkers there.

The west did basically the same thing. Not every "nuclear weapon bunker" at every American base actually held warheads.

[–] m4rtink 1 day ago

In the Czechoslovak case those bunkers were definitely for the warheads - far too small for a whole Scud missile, air conditioned, etc. The delivery mechanisms were notionally conventional & are documented as stationed elsewhere.

It was in those bunkers where the warheads would be (were ?) stored in the time of crisis as a forward deployment.

[–] dghughes 1 day ago

The ants are two weeks away from going nuclear.

[–] tristramb 1 day ago

Ant expert E.O.Wilson once said of communism: "Great idea. Wrong species"

[–] Arodex 1 day ago

Funny you say that when literally a few stories away on HN first page, you have this:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50388122

[–] Viliam1234 10 hours ago

The link you posted was about the work of volunteers.

In communist regimes, the people were anything but volunteers.

Linux or Wikipedia do not have soldiers protecting their boundaries, shooting in the back everyone who tries to escape the "workers' paradise".

[–] pessimizer 1 day ago

What does the "dictatorship of the proletariat" have to do with a bunch of ants falling through a hole in the ground? Is it because worker ants are called "worker" ants? Is a dictatorship when you fall down a hole and are left without a queen or any resources?

God could be imagined illustrating why we need queens and resources in a Soviet bunker because the Soviets believed there shouldn't be queens, or resources? Did the Soviets actually believe that there shouldn't be any natural resources? Are human "queens" our only source of reproduction?

This is really supposed to be an instructive metaphor for what happens when people who work are left to their own devices in a barren place, and that's supposed to make us reflect on the Soviet Union?

Don't worry, I know the answer: They're called "workers" and the situation is bad. The Soviets said that they were a society of "workers" and the Soviets were bad. Deep.

[–] varjag 1 day ago

I grew up in the Soviet Union so am entitled to whatever dab on communism can come up with.

[–] kian 1 day ago

name checks out