|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On August 11 2022 17:58 Simberto wrote:
I very much hope that a majority of Germans value democracy and freedom enough to recognize that we may need to suffer some minor inconveniences to fight an autocrats war of aggression.
Compared to similar situations in history, we are getting out of this so easily. No German has to go die in Ukraine, we just pay a bit more for energy and send some guns there.
I hope that the population is willing to accept this. We are part of this war, and we need to protect freedom and democracy (now i sound like a crazy american)
Others are dying and having their country blown to pieces. Paying a bit more for energy is the least we can do. Compared to all the shitty pointless wars the US has started over the decades, this is really one that is worth fighting. I believe that the German population will value this over some minor inconveniences.
While I agree with the sentiment, you should not downplay the increased prices as 'paying a bit more for energy' and 'minor inconvenience'. That might be true for you and me, but for lower income households its much more than that, with the potential to financially ruin many of them. It is important to acknowledge that since if it is not addressed it has the potential to erode support for ukraine.
There are more and more reports coming out that predict that due to energy prices and prices for all sorts of goods rising, many households won't be able to pay rent/cost of living, which needs to be addressed to ensure support. The current reports seem a bit too apocalyptic to me, but the general direction probably holds.
|
And for those, i very much hope that our government will do something to help them. There are lots of ways to do so, and i think that that is very necessary. Maybe one could even use this situation to tackle the generally exploitative housing situation.
Sadly, FDP is against anything that helps poor people.
If it weren't for these dickheads, one could use this situation for some necessary transformations which have been held up for ages. Instead we get subventions for oil companies.
What should be done is remove all anti-climate subventions and aggressively push that money towards lower income people. Klimageld is one way to do so, removing VAT on basic food items is another.
But thanks to FDP, for any 10c that goes to poor people, 90c needs to go to rich people.
|
On August 11 2022 17:51 Harris1st wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2022 01:35 Manit0u wrote:
I think that we still have to see the full extent of how the sanctions affect Russia in the long term. In my opinion if this lasts until the end of the year it will set Russia back at least a decade. Any longer than that and we're talking economic damage on a generational scale. While being rich in resources Russia wasn't self-sufficient before and you can't become self-sufficient as a country overnight. Having to switch most of industry to do different things, propping up new industries to fill the void at least somewhat etc. etc.
I think the biggest losses will be in the knowhow department as a lot of researchers and specialists left (and more will follow I assume), that will affect pretty much everything.
I'm also wondering if Russia is capable of creating facilities that would be able to produce the chips they so desperately need now. Nettles has one point though. They don't need to produce everything themselves, they can just go to Chinamart. This obviously will just shift the dependance from the west to the east and is not what Putin wants or claims to want. Germany is fine so far. I don't think the coming winter will be a big problem for citizens or industry. The question is just how much people and industry are willing to pay and the more success UA has with their counter offenses the less people here are willing to pay insane prices for energy and other stuff and there will be more and more cries to turn on NS2
That depends on whether or not China is set up to make those things are not. Things like soda? Yeah, sure, whatever. The proper tiers for their military vehicles? Not as likely. In those cases they will also have to spend time setting up production.
|
On August 11 2022 18:42 Simberto wrote:
And for those, i very much hope that our government will do something to help them. There are lots of ways to do so, and i think that that is very necessary. Maybe one could even use this situation to tackle the generally exploitative housing situation.
Sadly, FDP is against anything that helps poor people.
If it weren't for these dickheads, one could use this situation for some necessary transformations which have been held up for ages. Instead we get subventions for oil companies.
What should be done is remove all anti-climate subventions and aggressively push that money towards lower income people. Klimageld is one way to do so, removing VAT on basic food items is another.
But thanks to FDP, for any 10c that goes to poor people, 90c needs to go to rich people.
I wholeheartedly agree with you, but not all people do
And it's not just FDP, it's also parts of CDU as well as far-left (Linke) and far-right (AfD, Freies Sachsen)
https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/nord-stream-2-gasversorgung-russland-1.5636549 (German)
Es sei "völlig klar", dass man Nord Stream 2 jetzt öffnen müsse, sagt zum Beispiel Frank Bommert, stellvertretender Chef der CDU-Fraktion im Landtag von Brandenburg
"It's obvious we need to open NS2 now" says Frank Bommert, vice president CDU Brandenburg
|
Anecdote: was spending the week on Rügen (island in the Baltic Sea) and someone flew a plane around dragging a banner that said "open Nordstream 2 now!" yesterday. That was a strange experience and most people around us laughed about it. Overall I think our population will keep supporting the government's line, though.
|
United States41117 Posts
Ukraine getting more heavy weapons from Britain.
Ben Wallace, the British Defence Secretary, confirmed on Wednesday that London would give Ukraine three additional multiple-launch rocket systems in addition to the three already in Kyiv, as well as a "significant" number of rockets for them.
As European Pravda reports, Wallace said this in a BBC commentary.
Speaking at an international conference on aid to Ukraine in Copenhagen, the British Secretary of State for Defence noted that these high-precision weapons are already helping Ukraine target Russian ammunition supplies and command centres.
He said that Britain was "very pleased" with Ukraine's use of the missile launchers already provided by the West. He noted that Ukrainian forces have shown that they are now much better at identifying the targets to hit, so that they do not quickly run out of ammunition. Wallace remarked that this is part of Ukraine's transition from using old Soviet-era weapons to more modern NATO weapons.
"Our continued support sends a very clear message: Britain and the international community remain opposed to this illegal war and will stand side by side in providing defensive military assistance to Ukraine to help it defend itself against Putin's invasion," the British minister said.
The first British M270 multiple rocket launchers arrived in Ukraine in July. The M270 system can hit targets at a distance of up to 80 kilometres. Norway's Ministry of Defence has promised to provide the British with three replacement systems.
Great Britain will deliver dozens of artillery guns, hundreds of unmanned aerial vehicles and 1,600 more anti-tank weapons to Ukraine in the coming weeks.
Source
|
On August 11 2022 17:58 Simberto wrote:
I very much hope that a majority of Germans value democracy and freedom enough to recognize that we may need to suffer some minor inconveniences to fight an autocrats war of aggression.
Compared to similar situations in history, we are getting out of this so easily. No German has to go die in Ukraine, we just pay a bit more for energy and send some guns there.
I hope that the population is willing to accept this. We are part of this war, and we need to protect freedom and democracy (now i sound like a crazy american)
Others are dying and having their country blown to pieces. Paying a bit more for energy is the least we can do. Compared to all the shitty pointless wars the US has started over the decades, this is really one that is worth fighting. I believe that the German population will value this over some minor inconveniences.
Yes, I am of the same opinion and sincerely hope the majority will continue to support it. Of course the opposition parties will be crying about whatever the government does and obviously some of them will be against helping Ukraine by suffering some discomfort (Linke, parts of the CDU, and AFD). That is to be expected.
|
On August 11 2022 20:23 Harris1st wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2022 18:42 Simberto wrote:
And for those, i very much hope that our government will do something to help them. There are lots of ways to do so, and i think that that is very necessary. Maybe one could even use this situation to tackle the generally exploitative housing situation.
Sadly, FDP is against anything that helps poor people.
If it weren't for these dickheads, one could use this situation for some necessary transformations which have been held up for ages. Instead we get subventions for oil companies.
What should be done is remove all anti-climate subventions and aggressively push that money towards lower income people. Klimageld is one way to do so, removing VAT on basic food items is another.
But thanks to FDP, for any 10c that goes to poor people, 90c needs to go to rich people. I wholeheartedly agree with you, but not all people do And it's not just FDP, it's also parts of CDU as well as far-left (Linke) and far-right (AfD, Freies Sachsen) https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/nord-stream-2-gasversorgung-russland-1.5636549 (German) Show nested quote +Es sei "völlig klar", dass man Nord Stream 2 jetzt öffnen müsse, sagt zum Beispiel Frank Bommert, stellvertretender Chef der CDU-Fraktion im Landtag von Brandenburg Show nested quote +"It's obvious we need to open NS2 now" says Frank Bommert, vice president CDU Brandenburg If Russia is throttling NS1 to hurt Germany (and Europe as a whole), while still selling some gas at the current high prices for income, what do they think opening NS2 would do?
Its not like Russia would suddenly resume full gas delivery. If the want to sell Germany more gas they are fully able to do so currently.
|
On August 11 2022 22:52 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2022 20:23 Harris1st wrote:On August 11 2022 18:42 Simberto wrote:
And for those, i very much hope that our government will do something to help them. There are lots of ways to do so, and i think that that is very necessary. Maybe one could even use this situation to tackle the generally exploitative housing situation.
Sadly, FDP is against anything that helps poor people.
If it weren't for these dickheads, one could use this situation for some necessary transformations which have been held up for ages. Instead we get subventions for oil companies.
What should be done is remove all anti-climate subventions and aggressively push that money towards lower income people. Klimageld is one way to do so, removing VAT on basic food items is another.
But thanks to FDP, for any 10c that goes to poor people, 90c needs to go to rich people. I wholeheartedly agree with you, but not all people do And it's not just FDP, it's also parts of CDU as well as far-left (Linke) and far-right (AfD, Freies Sachsen) https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/nord-stream-2-gasversorgung-russland-1.5636549 (German) Es sei "völlig klar", dass man Nord Stream 2 jetzt öffnen müsse, sagt zum Beispiel Frank Bommert, stellvertretender Chef der CDU-Fraktion im Landtag von Brandenburg "It's obvious we need to open NS2 now" says Frank Bommert, vice president CDU Brandenburg If Russia is throttling NS1 to hurt Germany (and Europe as a whole), while still selling some gas at the current high prices for income, what do they think opening NS2 would do? Its not like Russia would suddenly resume full gas delivery. If the want to sell Germany more gas they are fully able to do so currently.
Those people may not be very well informed or behaving entirely rational.
|
On August 11 2022 17:51 Harris1st wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2022 01:35 Manit0u wrote:
I think that we still have to see the full extent of how the sanctions affect Russia in the long term. In my opinion if this lasts until the end of the year it will set Russia back at least a decade. Any longer than that and we're talking economic damage on a generational scale. While being rich in resources Russia wasn't self-sufficient before and you can't become self-sufficient as a country overnight. Having to switch most of industry to do different things, propping up new industries to fill the void at least somewhat etc. etc.
I think the biggest losses will be in the knowhow department as a lot of researchers and specialists left (and more will follow I assume), that will affect pretty much everything.
I'm also wondering if Russia is capable of creating facilities that would be able to produce the chips they so desperately need now. Nettles has one point though. They don't need to produce everything themselves, they can just go to Chinamart. This obviously will just shift the dependance from the west to the east and is not what Putin wants or claims to want. Germany is fine so far. I don't think the coming winter will be a big problem for citizens or industry. The question is just how much people and industry are willing to pay and the more success UA has with their counter offenses the less people here are willing to pay insane prices for energy and other stuff and there will be more and more cries to turn on NS2
Chinamart won't be a palatable option for them, China won't be able to make the same things in many industries and the stuff they can make on the same level they'll want for themselves and their growing economy. Building the new train lines will take a lot longer than they have to restart their economy. They can't ship anything because all the shipping companies left, no one is selling insurance for the black sea, and China is having a massive issue with shipping atm on their own.
I mean if the plan is to degrade the russian economy to the point where they are literally just a gas station for china they won't really need those chips or anything for their factories. What are they going to make that china is going to want to buy from them? what tech do they have left that china hasn't already advanced on?
|
On August 11 2022 20:23 Harris1st wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2022 18:42 Simberto wrote:
And for those, i very much hope that our government will do something to help them. There are lots of ways to do so, and i think that that is very necessary. Maybe one could even use this situation to tackle the generally exploitative housing situation.
Sadly, FDP is against anything that helps poor people.
If it weren't for these dickheads, one could use this situation for some necessary transformations which have been held up for ages. Instead we get subventions for oil companies.
What should be done is remove all anti-climate subventions and aggressively push that money towards lower income people. Klimageld is one way to do so, removing VAT on basic food items is another.
But thanks to FDP, for any 10c that goes to poor people, 90c needs to go to rich people. I wholeheartedly agree with you, but not all people do And it's not just FDP, it's also parts of CDU as well as far-left (Linke) and far-right (AfD, Freies Sachsen) https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/nord-stream-2-gasversorgung-russland-1.5636549 (German) Show nested quote +Es sei "völlig klar", dass man Nord Stream 2 jetzt öffnen müsse, sagt zum Beispiel Frank Bommert, stellvertretender Chef der CDU-Fraktion im Landtag von Brandenburg Show nested quote +"It's obvious we need to open NS2 now" says Frank Bommert, vice president CDU Brandenburg
I was focusing on FDP because they are currently in the ruling coalition, and thus actually matter. AfD, CxU and Linke can complain, but not actually make policy. Meanwhile, FDP can prevent good policy simply through being in the ruling coalition.
The opposition will always be against everything. CxU are mainly to blame for all of the current problems due to being the majority party in the ruling coalition for ages. They have also shown that they are very much into boomer shit.
AfD are crazypeople and probably funded in large parts by Russia, and sadly Linke has once again shown that they have a very inexplicable blind spot when looking towards Russia, too.
It is a bit sad, i don't get why we cannot have a left party that doesn't have a weird love for rightwing autocrats.
|
On August 11 2022 23:26 justanothertownie wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 11 2022 22:52 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2022 20:23 Harris1st wrote:On August 11 2022 18:42 Simberto wrote:
And for those, i very much hope that our government will do something to help them. There are lots of ways to do so, and i think that that is very necessary. Maybe one could even use this situation to tackle the generally exploitative housing situation.
Sadly, FDP is against anything that helps poor people.
If it weren't for these dickheads, one could use this situation for some necessary transformations which have been held up for ages. Instead we get subventions for oil companies.
What should be done is remove all anti-climate subventions and aggressively push that money towards lower income people. Klimageld is one way to do so, removing VAT on basic food items is another.
But thanks to FDP, for any 10c that goes to poor people, 90c needs to go to rich people. I wholeheartedly agree with you, but not all people do And it's not just FDP, it's also parts of CDU as well as far-left (Linke) and far-right (AfD, Freies Sachsen) https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/nord-stream-2-gasversorgung-russland-1.5636549 (German) Es sei "völlig klar", dass man Nord Stream 2 jetzt öffnen müsse, sagt zum Beispiel Frank Bommert, stellvertretender Chef der CDU-Fraktion im Landtag von Brandenburg "It's obvious we need to open NS2 now" says Frank Bommert, vice president CDU Brandenburg If Russia is throttling NS1 to hurt Germany (and Europe as a whole), while still selling some gas at the current high prices for income, what do they think opening NS2 would do? Its not like Russia would suddenly resume full gas delivery. If the want to sell Germany more gas they are fully able to do so currently. Those people may not be very well informed or behaving entirely rational.
It's self interest: The pipeline lands in Brandenburg. There are people waiting for their new well payed jobs in the gas industry. Promises and Investments have been made. Must have hit some people pretty hard up there.
|
On August 11 2022 17:20 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2022 19:37 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 10 2022 18:02 Silvanel wrote:It could be: 1. An loitering munition hitting stockpile of weapons (Russians are supposedly notorious for keeping them on air-fields prior to missions) 2. Long range rocket (Unannounced donation or UA made) 3. Drone 4. Sabotage 5. A submarine (yeah i have seen some people suggesting, there was an unannounced donation of submarine towards UA) sounds very far-fetched to me. 6. An accident I know we shouldn't trust RU, since they called sinking of Moskva an accident  and notorious other lies but accidents do happen in war. If UA wont take credit I think it is plausible that this distaster is of Russia's own making. Excluding the luckiest chain reaction known to man, we should assume from the videos and especially the range of damage that UA hit the airbase with explosives measured in tons. That's too much for sabotage, drones, etc. Perhaps a Hrim-2 weapons test? I heard that UA doesn't have what was needed to produce Hrim-2 for themselves. This basically leaves the option of early delivery of US MLRS Atacms. But that raises the question of what happened to the promise of not firing HIMARS onto Russian soil - US accepts that Crimea is fair game? UA fudged and called Russia's bluff regarding tactical nukes? Whatever it was, the casualty estimates are growing by the hour. This was a massive blow to the Russian southern defence and we should expect the tide to turn even more to UA's favour soon. UA hit the last bridge, the dam in Nova Kahovka, with precise strikes, all in a line, making sure there's still a narrow path for lighter equipment. Basically saying to the Russians, it's your last chance to get out.
Crimea is not Russian soil, it is Ukrainian. Of 195 countries, only 15 countries (North Korea, Myanmar, Venezuela, etc.) supports Crimea as a federal subject to Russia.
It doesn't have to be HIMARS (and they most likely weren't, the payload would be too small). I would put my bet on a missile system such as Sapsan TBM with modified Tochka-U (with the help from Turkey/Israel).
|
On August 12 2022 04:02 Neneu wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2022 17:20 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 10 2022 19:37 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 10 2022 18:02 Silvanel wrote:It could be: 1. An loitering munition hitting stockpile of weapons (Russians are supposedly notorious for keeping them on air-fields prior to missions) 2. Long range rocket (Unannounced donation or UA made) 3. Drone 4. Sabotage 5. A submarine (yeah i have seen some people suggesting, there was an unannounced donation of submarine towards UA) sounds very far-fetched to me. 6. An accident I know we shouldn't trust RU, since they called sinking of Moskva an accident and notorious other lies but accidents do happen in war. If UA wont take credit I think it is plausible that this distaster is of Russia's own making. Excluding the luckiest chain reaction known to man, we should assume from the videos and especially the range of damage that UA hit the airbase with explosives measured in tons. That's too much for sabotage, drones, etc. Perhaps a Hrim-2 weapons test? I heard that UA doesn't have what was needed to produce Hrim-2 for themselves. This basically leaves the option of early delivery of US MLRS Atacms. But that raises the question of what happened to the promise of not firing HIMARS onto Russian soil - US accepts that Crimea is fair game? UA fudged and called Russia's bluff regarding tactical nukes? Whatever it was, the casualty estimates are growing by the hour. This was a massive blow to the Russian southern defence and we should expect the tide to turn even more to UA's favour soon. UA hit the last bridge, the dam in Nova Kahovka, with precise strikes, all in a line, making sure there's still a narrow path for lighter equipment. Basically saying to the Russians, it's your last chance to get out. https://twitter.com/NickWallington2/status/1557377841066541059 Crimea is not Russian soil, it is Ukrainian. Of 195 countries, only 15 countries (North Korea, Myanmar, Venezuela, etc.) supports Crimea as a federal subject to Russia. It doesn't have to be HIMARS (and they most likely weren't, the payload would be too small). I would put my bet on a missile system such as Sapsan TBM with modified Tochka-U (with the help from Turkey/Israel).
You're preaching to the choir here. Crimea is Ukraine in my book. But RU said they'd respond with nukes if RU soil was attacked and US believed them, so what's going on now is less than clear.
|
Russia have already been attacked several times. The bridges north of Charkiv, oil depot in Belgorod, at least one airfield in Rostov area. Add to that those strange fires that keeping happening in facilities all around Russia. It doesn't seem likely that they will go nuclear over this. Especially against a country they are trying to take over.
|
On August 12 2022 04:15 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2022 04:02 Neneu wrote:On August 11 2022 17:20 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 10 2022 19:37 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 10 2022 18:02 Silvanel wrote:It could be: 1. An loitering munition hitting stockpile of weapons (Russians are supposedly notorious for keeping them on air-fields prior to missions) 2. Long range rocket (Unannounced donation or UA made) 3. Drone 4. Sabotage 5. A submarine (yeah i have seen some people suggesting, there was an unannounced donation of submarine towards UA) sounds very far-fetched to me. 6. An accident I know we shouldn't trust RU, since they called sinking of Moskva an accident and notorious other lies but accidents do happen in war. If UA wont take credit I think it is plausible that this distaster is of Russia's own making. Excluding the luckiest chain reaction known to man, we should assume from the videos and especially the range of damage that UA hit the airbase with explosives measured in tons. That's too much for sabotage, drones, etc. Perhaps a Hrim-2 weapons test? I heard that UA doesn't have what was needed to produce Hrim-2 for themselves. This basically leaves the option of early delivery of US MLRS Atacms. But that raises the question of what happened to the promise of not firing HIMARS onto Russian soil - US accepts that Crimea is fair game? UA fudged and called Russia's bluff regarding tactical nukes? Whatever it was, the casualty estimates are growing by the hour. This was a massive blow to the Russian southern defence and we should expect the tide to turn even more to UA's favour soon. UA hit the last bridge, the dam in Nova Kahovka, with precise strikes, all in a line, making sure there's still a narrow path for lighter equipment. Basically saying to the Russians, it's your last chance to get out. https://twitter.com/NickWallington2/status/1557377841066541059 Crimea is not Russian soil, it is Ukrainian. Of 195 countries, only 15 countries (North Korea, Myanmar, Venezuela, etc.) supports Crimea as a federal subject to Russia. It doesn't have to be HIMARS (and they most likely weren't, the payload would be too small). I would put my bet on a missile system such as Sapsan TBM with modified Tochka-U (with the help from Turkey/Israel). You're preaching to the choir here. Crimea is Ukraine in my book. But RU said they'd respond with nukes if RU soil was attacked and US believed them, so what's going on now is less than clear.
Well according to Russia there is no such thing as Ukraine as a country, so if going by their definition any missile in Ukraine would be striking Russian soil. Can't use their definition then of what is Russian soil.
|
On August 12 2022 04:48 Neneu wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2022 04:15 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 12 2022 04:02 Neneu wrote:On August 11 2022 17:20 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 10 2022 19:37 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 10 2022 18:02 Silvanel wrote:It could be: 1. An loitering munition hitting stockpile of weapons (Russians are supposedly notorious for keeping them on air-fields prior to missions) 2. Long range rocket (Unannounced donation or UA made) 3. Drone 4. Sabotage 5. A submarine (yeah i have seen some people suggesting, there was an unannounced donation of submarine towards UA) sounds very far-fetched to me. 6. An accident I know we shouldn't trust RU, since they called sinking of Moskva an accident and notorious other lies but accidents do happen in war. If UA wont take credit I think it is plausible that this distaster is of Russia's own making. Excluding the luckiest chain reaction known to man, we should assume from the videos and especially the range of damage that UA hit the airbase with explosives measured in tons. That's too much for sabotage, drones, etc. Perhaps a Hrim-2 weapons test? I heard that UA doesn't have what was needed to produce Hrim-2 for themselves. This basically leaves the option of early delivery of US MLRS Atacms. But that raises the question of what happened to the promise of not firing HIMARS onto Russian soil - US accepts that Crimea is fair game? UA fudged and called Russia's bluff regarding tactical nukes? Whatever it was, the casualty estimates are growing by the hour. This was a massive blow to the Russian southern defence and we should expect the tide to turn even more to UA's favour soon. UA hit the last bridge, the dam in Nova Kahovka, with precise strikes, all in a line, making sure there's still a narrow path for lighter equipment. Basically saying to the Russians, it's your last chance to get out. https://twitter.com/NickWallington2/status/1557377841066541059 Crimea is not Russian soil, it is Ukrainian. Of 195 countries, only 15 countries (North Korea, Myanmar, Venezuela, etc.) supports Crimea as a federal subject to Russia. It doesn't have to be HIMARS (and they most likely weren't, the payload would be too small). I would put my bet on a missile system such as Sapsan TBM with modified Tochka-U (with the help from Turkey/Israel). You're preaching to the choir here. Crimea is Ukraine in my book. But RU said they'd respond with nukes if RU soil was attacked and US believed them, so what's going on now is less than clear. Well according to Russia there is no such thing as Ukraine as a country, so if going by their definition any missile in Ukraine would be striking Russian soil. Can't use their definition then of what is Russian soil.
Wait, so the Russians are using Russian missiles to bomb Russian targets in Russia? I am kind of losing track of the Russian lies at this point, and don't really care anymore.
|
United States41117 Posts
More explosions reported at Nova Kakhovka...
|
Russian Federation618 Posts
On August 12 2022 04:48 Neneu wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2022 04:15 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 12 2022 04:02 Neneu wrote:On August 11 2022 17:20 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 10 2022 19:37 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 10 2022 18:02 Silvanel wrote:It could be: 1. An loitering munition hitting stockpile of weapons (Russians are supposedly notorious for keeping them on air-fields prior to missions) 2. Long range rocket (Unannounced donation or UA made) 3. Drone 4. Sabotage 5. A submarine (yeah i have seen some people suggesting, there was an unannounced donation of submarine towards UA) sounds very far-fetched to me. 6. An accident I know we shouldn't trust RU, since they called sinking of Moskva an accident and notorious other lies but accidents do happen in war. If UA wont take credit I think it is plausible that this distaster is of Russia's own making. Excluding the luckiest chain reaction known to man, we should assume from the videos and especially the range of damage that UA hit the airbase with explosives measured in tons. That's too much for sabotage, drones, etc. Perhaps a Hrim-2 weapons test? I heard that UA doesn't have what was needed to produce Hrim-2 for themselves. This basically leaves the option of early delivery of US MLRS Atacms. But that raises the question of what happened to the promise of not firing HIMARS onto Russian soil - US accepts that Crimea is fair game? UA fudged and called Russia's bluff regarding tactical nukes? Whatever it was, the casualty estimates are growing by the hour. This was a massive blow to the Russian southern defence and we should expect the tide to turn even more to UA's favour soon. UA hit the last bridge, the dam in Nova Kahovka, with precise strikes, all in a line, making sure there's still a narrow path for lighter equipment. Basically saying to the Russians, it's your last chance to get out. https://twitter.com/NickWallington2/status/1557377841066541059 Crimea is not Russian soil, it is Ukrainian. Of 195 countries, only 15 countries (North Korea, Myanmar, Venezuela, etc.) supports Crimea as a federal subject to Russia. It doesn't have to be HIMARS (and they most likely weren't, the payload would be too small). I would put my bet on a missile system such as Sapsan TBM with modified Tochka-U (with the help from Turkey/Israel). You're preaching to the choir here. Crimea is Ukraine in my book. But RU said they'd respond with nukes if RU soil was attacked and US believed them, so what's going on now is less than clear. Well according to Russia there is no such thing as Ukraine as a country, so if going by their definition any missile in Ukraine would be striking Russian soil. Can't use their definition then of what is Russian soil.
Is there a quote on that? I didn't see any Kremlin official denying the existence of Ukraine as a state.
As for hitting targets within Russia - despite the scale of war, there seem to be boundaries which both sides are rarely crossing. Ukrainians could definetly hit more targets within Russia (especially in border regions), but instead they do it sporadically and Ukraine officials claim to be not involved in any of this cases. Russia, on the other hand, rarely attacks Ukraine rail and bridge infrastracture, despite showing capability to do so (especially on Zatoka bridge near Odessa, though missiles did struck bridges in Dnipro and Zaporozhie couple of times) and the fact that it is immensely important for UA war effort. And I'm not even talking about the fact that no government building in Kiev was ever attacked (not counting the Security Service of Ukraine headquarters on 2nd day of war).
|
On August 12 2022 06:01 Ardias wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2022 04:48 Neneu wrote:On August 12 2022 04:15 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 12 2022 04:02 Neneu wrote:On August 11 2022 17:20 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 10 2022 19:37 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 10 2022 18:02 Silvanel wrote:It could be: 1. An loitering munition hitting stockpile of weapons (Russians are supposedly notorious for keeping them on air-fields prior to missions) 2. Long range rocket (Unannounced donation or UA made) 3. Drone 4. Sabotage 5. A submarine (yeah i have seen some people suggesting, there was an unannounced donation of submarine towards UA) sounds very far-fetched to me. 6. An accident I know we shouldn't trust RU, since they called sinking of Moskva an accident and notorious other lies but accidents do happen in war. If UA wont take credit I think it is plausible that this distaster is of Russia's own making. Excluding the luckiest chain reaction known to man, we should assume from the videos and especially the range of damage that UA hit the airbase with explosives measured in tons. That's too much for sabotage, drones, etc. Perhaps a Hrim-2 weapons test? I heard that UA doesn't have what was needed to produce Hrim-2 for themselves. This basically leaves the option of early delivery of US MLRS Atacms. But that raises the question of what happened to the promise of not firing HIMARS onto Russian soil - US accepts that Crimea is fair game? UA fudged and called Russia's bluff regarding tactical nukes? Whatever it was, the casualty estimates are growing by the hour. This was a massive blow to the Russian southern defence and we should expect the tide to turn even more to UA's favour soon. UA hit the last bridge, the dam in Nova Kahovka, with precise strikes, all in a line, making sure there's still a narrow path for lighter equipment. Basically saying to the Russians, it's your last chance to get out. https://twitter.com/NickWallington2/status/1557377841066541059 Crimea is not Russian soil, it is Ukrainian. Of 195 countries, only 15 countries (North Korea, Myanmar, Venezuela, etc.) supports Crimea as a federal subject to Russia. It doesn't have to be HIMARS (and they most likely weren't, the payload would be too small). I would put my bet on a missile system such as Sapsan TBM with modified Tochka-U (with the help from Turkey/Israel). You're preaching to the choir here. Crimea is Ukraine in my book. But RU said they'd respond with nukes if RU soil was attacked and US believed them, so what's going on now is less than clear. Well according to Russia there is no such thing as Ukraine as a country, so if going by their definition any missile in Ukraine would be striking Russian soil. Can't use their definition then of what is Russian soil. Is there a quote on that? I didn't see any Kremlin official denying the existence of Ukraine as a state. As for hitting targets within Russia - despite the scale of war, there seem to be boundaries which both sides are rarely crossing. Ukrainians could definetly hit more targets within Russia (especially in border regions), but instead they do it sporadically and Ukraine officials claim to be not involved in any of this cases. Russia, on the other hand, rarely attacks Ukraine rail and bridge infrastracture, despite showing capability to do so (especially on Zatoka bridge near Odessa, though missiles did struck bridges in Dnipro and Zaporozhie couple of times) and the fact that it is immensely important for UA war effort. And I'm not even talking about the fact that no government building in Kiev was ever attacked (not counting the Security Service of Ukraine headquarters on 2nd day of war).
In this speech prior to the war, Putin denied Ukraine full statehood. This was not denied by any official sources in Russia.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/21/world/europe/putin-ukraine.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
