|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The War in Europe | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
But anyway ...
I've been trying to work out what happened with the Moskva. Moskva mean Moscow of course so the Ukrainians are rather pleased to be able to say that they sank Moscow. Russia claims a fire in the munitions room causing an explosion and that all sailors were rescued and the Moskva sank in high seas while being towed to port. Ukraine says that it sank the Moskva with two Neptune land to sea missiles.The also say that they used a Turkish drone to occupy its radar before attacking. The West says there was cloud cover so satellites couldn't see what happened. (No infra red?). But it also says that they believe that the ship was sailing towards port under its own steam when it sank and it doubts many survived. There are unconfirmed reports that the Commander of the Black Sea Fleet Admiral Igor Osipov has been arrested in Russia. Then Russia bombs the Ukrainian factory that makes the Neptune missiles. Why they would do that directly after the sinking if their ship sank by 'natural causes' is a mystery. Obviously the Ukrainians did it and it was a real coup. It may take the Russian navy out of the game, or at least make them very cautious. Russia is also complaining that Ukraine is attacking Russia in Russia and warning of dire consequences. The Ukrainians are, it seems, hitting the supply lines of the new invasion lines moving from the North to the East. Russia seems to think that isn't playing fair. Meanwhile it seems like only hours or days before Mariupol falls. Poor sods. Russia is now following a policy of flattening cities if they can't take them, hough they are trying to keep the actual ports unmolested. Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Pentagon says 2 Neptune anti-ship missiles caused the sinking of the Moskva.
Understand the Neptune is a Ukrainian homegrown weapon based off the cold war Soviet KH-35 missile. It was not a NATO provided asset. These guys continue to show what "determined" is really all about. What Happened on Day 51 of the War in Ukraine - The New York Times Germany announces military aid for Ukraine – as it happened | Ukraine | The Guardian Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given. Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned! |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2578 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 6.8 |
https://www.reddit.com/...oon_about_the_moskva_title_russian
[ Put image directly in the message. --Admin ] Edited by Admin, : Add image."I'm the Grim Reaper now, Mitch. Step aside." Death to #TzarVladimirtheCondemned! Enjoy every sandwich! - xongsmith, 5.7dawkins scale |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 393 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
We can all read the NATO Charter and see that it is intentionally vague.
We all know that there is a whole spectrum of possible responses by NATO, individual Nations and by Russia. We all should know that there is a change towards right wing autocratic governments in the EU, most notably in France. But not one of us actually knows what any of the many players will do.My Website: My Website |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Percy writes: We care very much about "what Russia wants/needs/demands." If we didn't we'd be much less circumspect in the assistance we provide Ukraine. We are taking absolutely no notice of what Putin demands.We are making our own calculations of what actions to take. quote: The day after receipt of this 'note', Biden announced that he was sending another $800m of arms.
quote: Russia warns US of repercussions if it sends more arms to Ukraine – reports | Ukraine | The Guardian Biden approves $800M in new military assistance for Ukraine | AP News Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22388 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Tangle writes: I've been trying to work out what happened with the Moskva. Moskva mean Moscow of course so the Ukrainians are rather pleased to be able to say that they sank Moscow. Before you wrote your message US officials here had already announced that two Ukrainian missiles had taken out the Muskva. This is from Moskva, Russia’s Prized Ship, Was Hit by Missiles, U.S. Officials Say - The New York Times:
quote: The Russian navy has played only a minor role in the conflict so far, but the Muskva would likely have played a support role in any future amphibious assaults such as against Odessa.
Russia is also complaining that Ukraine is attacking Russia in Russia and warning of dire consequences. The Ukrainians are, it seems, hitting the supply lines of the new invasion lines moving from the North to the East. Russia seems to think that isn't playing fair. Russia seems to miss the irony of its army running roughshod over Ukraine when they complain about attacks in their own territory. They also miss the irony of complaining about the US and NATO sending arms into Ukraine while Russia sends in an entire army and all the associated armaments. It's as if they feel the rest of the world should stand down while they complete their conquest of Ukraine. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22388 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Tangle writes: Percy writes: We care very much about "what Russia wants/needs/demands." If we didn't we'd be much less circumspect in the assistance we provide Ukraine. We are taking absolutely "no notice of what Putin demands. Now you're changing your phrasing, but assuming "We are taking absolutley no notice of what Putin demands" means the exact same thing as when you earlier said "Nobody cares what Russia wants/needs/demands anymore," then this remains self-evidently untrue. Perhaps what you mean to say is that we don't cave to Putin demands, but we certainly notice them, and these "wants/needs/demands" by no means have to be explicit. Our reluctance to provide certain types of armaments to Ukraine is because of concern that it might escalate the conflict, not because Russia told us we better not. (Although now that Russia has sent that diplomatic note warning us that sending certain weapons could escalate the conflict, someone could argue that we *are* caving to Russian demands.) Zelenskyy complains daily that the west is not providing enough or heavy enough armaments. Why aren't we? The answer is obvious. We're concerned about the Russian response. We care very much about "what Russia wants/needs/demands." If we didn't we would be providing at least some of these weapons Zelenskyy wants so much.
We are making our own calculations of what actions to take. Yes, of course we are, and trying to account for Russian reactions is part of those calculations.
quote: I don't know why you felt the need to quote this. The wording looks very familiar, probably the exact same article I read yesterday. The State Department isn't going to respond publicly, but if Russia did truly send this démarche to the US then it was undoubtedly "noticed," your word. If by "noticed" you instead meant "acquiesced" or something like that, then of course we wouldn't acquiesce. it was never implied that we would.
The day after receipt of this 'note', Biden announced that he was sending another $800m of arms.
quote: Yes, I know. Everyone knows. It's all over the news. But what we're sending is insufficient. It's enough to prolong the conflict, but not enough to make a Ukraine victory likely. Why aren't we sending more and heavier weapons? Why an additional $800 million instead $10 billion? Why aren't we putting US and NATO men and materiel on the ground and in the air? Why isn't Ukraine a no-fly zone? The answer is because of concerns that Russia might find such moves provocative, and because NATO is not the infinitely powerful force you seem to believe. Also, that it's an alliance of 30 nations instead of just a single nation probably complicates decision making. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
NATO is neither doing exactly what Ukraine wants nor exactly what Putin wants. It's making up its own mind about how best to help Ukraine without causing Russia to do something that could lead to an all out war with the NATO.
We're not going full tilt into this war, not because of anything he's saying/wanting/demanding but because we have intelligence about what he's militarily capable of. He can posture, demand, threaten, whatever - nobody is listening because he can't be trusted and it's all part of his game (hence sending $800m arms the day after Putin told us not to). What matters is what he could do if we get it wrong. We're watching what isJe suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22388 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
It's been a week since I last posted about sanctions, so I'm checking in again to see how they're doing. First, here's the price of the ruble right up through yesterday. It has recovered most of its value:
I didn't note this in my last post, so I'll note it now, that I don't think seizing oligarch's yachts has any impact on Russian war capabilities. I'm not sure of the impact of making oligarch's unhappy on Putin's hold on power. Russian President Vladimir Putin asserts that sanctions have failed : NPR. Is Putin telling the truth? That link is to a transcript of a report by NPR's Charles Maynes in Moscow yesterday. Maynes says "money [is] pouring in from Russian energy exports, which are huge. But all this has created this kind of weird sense of normalcy here." He describes Putin's belief that he can pivot from western trading partners to other trading partners, such as China or India. But he goes on to say some experts, such as Natalya Zubarevich, a specialist on Russia's regional development with Moscow State University aren't as optimistic, believing that the "sanctions will be devastating," though that's not apparent yet. She believes the sanctions require more time and the "real impact" will only be felt "starting in May or June when production lines will break down" because of lack of "imported parts." But Fox News' Russian economy poised to crash as sanctions take their toll | Fox Business reports that "Russian manufacturing activity plunged in March." They don't provide numbers so it's not possible to know what they mean by "plunged," but given that the sanctions only started in March it's hard to believe they could have a severe and nearly instantaneous effect in March. Fox goes on to report that the Institute of International Finance predicts Russian GDP will drop 15% this year. A 15% drop is big, but "devastating" isn't the word I'd use if the hope is to affect the Russian war effort. If the goal is instead just to punish the Russian public for letting an evil dictator take control then I suppose the sanctions might eventually be deemed "successful," but Russia still probably takes Ukraine. Other estimates of how much the Russian economy will shrink due to the sanctions are lower. Goldman Sachs predicts a drop of 10%, Capital Economics forecasts 12%, and Barclays said it could be as much as 12.4%. My big complaint is that each week brings reports of new sanctions being considered, and I wonder why we haven't already imposed these sanctions? What are we waiting for? We know sanctions are slow acting, and we also know the longer they go on the more the targeted country figures out ways around them or to compensate, as the recent example of Iran tells us (and there are tons more historical examples). Russia may eventually default on its foreign debt, but the default process takes time. Russia paid off debt on April 4 in rubles when the agreed upon currency was dollars, so they're technically already in default. But there's a one month grace period, and then the Kremlin will probably take legal action. It could be next year before there is any formal declaration of Russia being in default on its debt. I still believe sanctions are slow-acting to no-acting when it comes to influencing a countries behavior, and this recent Russian example of sanctions at work seems no different. --Percy Edited by Percy, : Fix formatting of image.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2284 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.8
|
Why isn't Ukraine a no-fly zone?
cause it would mean NATO forces killing russian personnel and attacking russian units inside russia. NATO does not want a war with russia. Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds soon I discovered that this rock thing was true Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world And so there was only one thing I could do Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4344 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.8
|
I didn't note this in my last post, so I'll note it now, that I don't think seizing oligarch's yachts has any impact on Russian war capabilities. I'm not sure of the impact of making oligarch's unhappy on Putin's hold on power. I don't think seizing oligarch's yachts was intended to have any effect on the war. It was intended to make everyone else on the planet a little happier knowing that toys were taken away from some really, really rich criminals. But one thing I have noticed, is really rich people don't give a shit about loosing stuff, even expensive stuff like normal people feel when our hard earned stuff is stolen. Rich people are still rich, and they just don't value things they never had to work hard for.
I still believe sanctions are slow-acting to no-acting when it comes to influencing a countries behavior, and this recent Russian example of sanctions at work seems no different. It looks like sanctions are what democracies do when they have almost no influence over events or behavior of tyrants. They would probably work to significantly weaken the tyrants if they were complete blockades of anything going into or coming out of the country, but blockades are impossible and take cooperation and possible sacrifice by the blockaders, so all we spectators can do is sit around and argue about what might happen. I have seen no solution proposals that have any chance of actually ending this war without a whole shitload more death and destruction. I predict that Putin (and the rest of the world) are not going to be happy with how it ends.What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22388 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Tangle writes: NATO is neither doing exactly what Ukraine wants nor exactly what Putin wants. But below you say "nobody is listening" to Putin. Why would we do anything Putin wants, even know what he wants, if we're not listening to him? I would think we'd be listening to everything he says and assessing what it means, such as whether it's true, false, bluster, propaganda, a mix, whatever. Over here we have a government division called the State Department, part of whose job it is to assess the statements of foreign leaders. Concerning what we should do, we'd better do everything Ukraine needs to mount an effective defense. Zelenskyy's desires should carry a great deal of weight because as president of the Ukraine he probably has a good idea of their defense needs. What Putin says must be interpreted in the context of him being a murderous dictator with dreams of resurrecting the Soviet empire.
It's making up its own mind about how best to help Ukraine without causing Russia to do something that could lead to an all out war with the NATO. That's pretty much the definition of taking Russia's "wants/needs/demands" into account.
We're not going full tilt into this war, not because of anything he's saying/wanting/demanding but because we have intelligence about what he's militarily capable of. It was you that shifted from Russia's "wants/needs/demands" to "Putin's demands." I've only responded to the former, and now you're trying to make this about something different, about things Putin himself is "saying/wanting/demanding." It's fine with me if that's what you'd rather to talk about, but you have to tell me first, not change horses in midstream.
He can posture, demand, threaten, whatever - nobody is listening because he can't be trusted and it's all part of his game (hence sending $800m arms the day after Putin told us not to). What matters is what he could do if we get it wrong. I completely agree that Putin can't be trusted, and I've never said anything about Putin's postures, demands or threats. Again, if that's what you want to discuss, fine, but that's not what we were talking about. Hopefully we're making plans for how to save Moldova, one plan for if Ukraine survives, another for if it doesn't. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22388 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
DrJones* writes: Why isn't Ukraine a no-fly zone?
cause it would mean NATO forces killing Russian personnel... True. But why should uninvited Russian jets be permitted to fly over Ukraine and attack targets with impunity, while welcome NATO jets that could provide defense are excluded?
...and attacking Russian units inside Russia. I don't get this one. I grant that it would make turning Ukraine into a no-fly zone easier if we took out airbases and other airborne support resources in Russia, but why is that necessary?
NATO does not want a war with Russia. Then call it a peace mission. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2284 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.8
|
But why should uninvited Russian jets be permitted to fly over Ukraine and attack targets with impunity, while welcome NATO jets that could provide defense are excluded?
because NATO does not want a war with Russia.
I don't get this one. I grant that it would make turning Ukraine into a no-fly zone easier if we took out airbases and other airborne support resources in Russia, but why is that necessary?
to enforce the no-fly zone your aircraft need to be protected. If Russia parks a SAM system on their side of the border and targets aircraft in Ukrainian airspace that SAM system needs to be destroyed.
Then call it a peace mission.
as we've seen with Russia's "Special Military Operation" you can call it whatever the fuck you want it's still war. War never changes.It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds soon I discovered that this rock thing was true Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world And so there was only one thing I could do Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22388 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Oh, I see, for you many of the concerns come back to avoiding war with Russia, where war is loosely defined as anything where nations' militaries release their weaponry upon each other. Why does NATO need to avoid a war with Russia?
Of course, we shouldn't be asking about NATO. NATO can't get involved in Ukraine, either in the air or on the ground, because it has no justification. Ukraine is not a NATO member, so Article 5 does not come into play. It would have to be the US and its NATO allies, most likely Britain and France. And we probably can't count on France right now given that French election campaigning is currently underway and Macron can't be too hawkish without negatively impacting his election chances. The problem with the US position on a no-fly zone, namely that it would lead to direct combat between nuclear nations, is that we're the ones backing away. Look at it from the reverse position. Because we knew Russia was going to invade, before that happened we could have set up a no-fly zone over Ukraine. Then it would have been Russian planes coming into airspace occupied by American planes. I don't think Russian planes would shy away because they don't want war with America. They might shy away because their planes are inferior, but not because they don't want war with America. We are again taking the appeaser's position, which we know doesn't work. It can postpone confrontation but not prevent it. The list of countries that have fallen to Russian aggression lengthens: Chechnya, Georgia, the Crimea, the Donbas region of Ukraine, and now possibly some larger portion of Ukraine, and in the future the rest of Ukraine, then Moldova, then the Baltics, and so on. At some point US forces will have to engage Russian forces, and as history tells us, the longer you put it off the worse it will be.
to enforce the no-fly zone your aircraft need to be protected. If Russia parks a SAM system on their side of the border and targets aircraft in Ukrainian airspace that SAM system needs to be destroyed. The US has invested heavily in stealth technology.
Then call it a peace mission.
as we've seen with Russia's "Special Military Operation" you can call it whatever the fuck you want it's still war. War never changes. I was glib. Sorry. --Percy
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024