|
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 June 23 2023 23:05 Excludos wrote:
2. US can unilaterally declare it as an attack on NATO. Any one NATO member can call Article 5. There's no overreach, it is designed to work this way. Otherwise the whole alliance would be useless, as people would be free to not give a shit about Country X being invaded and calling article 5.
Historic precedence paints a different picture. Article 5 has only been invoked once after the 11th of September attacks after meetings of the Nato council. It was not done unilaterally, but had to be agreed upon by the members of the council. Article 4 also heavily points in the direction of no unilateral action:
The Parties will consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened.
And lastly, Article 5 is deliberately left vague in terms of how a response from the Nato allies would look like, further requiring everyone to be on the same page as invoking article 5 and only getting lukewarm support from your allies would seriously endanger the reputation of the alliance.
Given all the nato wave cringe and other memes, its easy to forget that nato is not only a defensive alliance in its intend, but its entire design makes it very safe against escalations getting out of hand. A unilateral invocation of article 5 might not be impossible, but it definitely is impractical.
|
|
|
On June 23 2023 23:05 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2023 16:01 Acrofales wrote:On June 23 2023 15:43 Copymizer wrote:
I think this is a very good and powerful message to send in order to deter russia Eh, I don't like it. 1. It seems designed as a way to say "look, Ukraine is protected by NATO, job done" when it covers the scariest but also least likely attack Russia is going to do, but none of the ways Ukraine needs help right now. 2. The US cannot unilaterally declare that nuclear attacks on Ukraine are an attack on NATO. Why isn't this a NATO statement that France, Germany, UK, and even Turkey have to agree with? It feels like overreach. 3. Ironically, it creates a perverse incentive for Ukraine to do a false flag attack on Zaporizhze if they are ever feeling truly desperate in their war effort and force NATO to invoke article 5. Anything that creates a potential incentive to blow up a nuclear power plant is a terrible idea. 1. A nuclear attack on Ukraine won't affect just Ukraine, the fallout will fall all across Europe 2. US can unilaterally declare it as an attack on NATO. Any one NATO member can call Article 5. There's no overreach, it is designed to work this way. Otherwise the whole alliance would be useless, as people would be free to not give a shit about Country X being invaded and calling article 5. 3. It does not. Ukraine's only chance of succeeding in this war is with support from the west. They have zero reasons to make themselves less popular. The truth of false flag operations has a nasty tendency to come out sooner or later. At that point, every ounce of support Ukraine has would be withdrawn. It would be genuinely suicide Currently, the only people saber rattling with Nuclear weapons is Russia. A powerful statement reminding them of the consequences of such actions is not out of line, an overreach, or in any way creates incentive for Ukraine to blow up their nuclear powerplants in an attempt to pretend that it's Russia
1. I agree, and Poland, Rumania, the Baltic States or Germany invoking article 5 if Russia deliberately blows up Zaporizhze as a sort of "dirty bomb" substitute would be reasonable. The US signaling support for a neighboring country invoking article 5 in the case of a nuclear escalation seems excellent. That isn't what this is, though.
2. While the US could certainly *try* to invoke article 5, it'd be quite the stretch to claim that a nuclear attack on Ukraine or deliberately causing the melt-down of Zaporizhze is an attack on the US. As such, article 5 would simply not apply and such an idiotic action would no doubt cause extreme political harm to NATO (unless of course, it was done in collaboration with NATO allies, as one would expect in such a situation). The senators signing such a declaration to do so unilaterally is thus rather nonsensical.
3. Yes. That's why I said "in the case of them losing the war" and "as a last ditch effort". The incentive still exists, even if it would likely be found out eventually, and have the adverse effects, a drowning man will clutch at a straw.
|
Looks like next step after F16s are cluster munitions.
I have a feeling this is more American politics than anything else. The current administration has an intrest in showing very tangible results before the next election and (some) republicans want to position themselves as being more hawkish than Biden (both incase it goes well or in case it does not).
Probably the pace is to slow for their liking and both asked the pentagon what could be done. Aircraft will not have a decisive effect.
5000+ artillery rounds per day for 20 months which are even better at dealing with trenches and counter battery fire would likely make a huge difference.
Would more than double Ukraines firepower untill the production ramp up is complete.
|
United States43460 Posts
Ukraine requested the cluster munitions to dismantle them as drone grenades so other than the bad optics it seems an excellent way of decommissioning a weapon system the US will never use.
|
On June 24 2023 01:14 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Looks like next step after F16s are cluster munitions.
I have a feeling this is more American politics than anything else. The current administration has an intrest in showing very tangible results before the next election and (some) republicans want to position themselves as being more hawkish than Biden (both incase it goes well or in case it does not).
Probably the pace is to slow for their liking and both asked the pentagon what could be done. Aircraft will not have a decisive effect.
5000+ artillery rounds per day for 20 months which are even better at dealing with trenches and counter battery fire would likely make a huge difference.
Would more than double Ukraines firepower untill the production ramp up is complete.
Cluster ammunition is illegal according to Geneve (Not to be confused with cluster mines, which are legal if the mines themselves are. Aka: Self destructive AT mines), so we won't see Ukraine deploy that, no. It's also incredibly shitty to do on your own home soil, because your own population are the ones who have to suffer for it after the war is over.
Dismantling cluster ammunition for other uses is a great way to get rid of them
|
On June 24 2023 02:12 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2023 01:14 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Looks like next step after F16s are cluster munitions.
I have a feeling this is more American politics than anything else. The current administration has an intrest in showing very tangible results before the next election and (some) republicans want to position themselves as being more hawkish than Biden (both incase it goes well or in case it does not).
Probably the pace is to slow for their liking and both asked the pentagon what could be done. Aircraft will not have a decisive effect.
5000+ artillery rounds per day for 20 months which are even better at dealing with trenches and counter battery fire would likely make a huge difference.
Would more than double Ukraines firepower untill the production ramp up is complete. Cluster ammunition is illegal according to Geneve (Not to be confused with cluster mines, which are legal if the mines themselves are. Aka: Self destructive AT mines), so we won't see Ukraine deploy that, no. It's also incredibly shitty to do on your own home soil, because your own population are the ones who have to suffer for it after the war is over. Dismantling cluster ammunition for other uses is a great way to get rid of them
1. Wrong. The cluster munitions treaty of 2008 is seperate from the Geneva convention and only applies to states that has ratified. Which neither Ukraine, the US or Russia has done. So it's perfectly legal.
2. Yes but Ukraine has still requsted munitions (and unclear if Turkey provided some) and both sides have used them already. Also prolonged warfare is incredibly shitty for your citizens in itself and also generates UXO in vastquantities. So if it ends the war faster and is mainly used in specific areas it could end up being significantly less shitty for future generations.
Also 3 mn shells and 1 mn other munitions might actually make the Russian army do a double take if they are pressured already. They know how much absurd amount of artillery fire sucks and they don't want to be on the other end of that stick.
|
Uh.... what? Sounds almost like he's announcing an attempt at a coup.
|
No, just reading the title but that clearly says the MoD. not Putin.
This is standard dictatorship stuff. Let subordinates fight, in this case Wagner and the MoD, so that they are to busy to fight the glorious leader.
Also might be set up to shift blame for Russia's loss to the MoD instead of blaming the glorious leader
|
On June 24 2023 03:09 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2023 02:12 Excludos wrote:On June 24 2023 01:14 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Looks like next step after F16s are cluster munitions.
I have a feeling this is more American politics than anything else. The current administration has an intrest in showing very tangible results before the next election and (some) republicans want to position themselves as being more hawkish than Biden (both incase it goes well or in case it does not).
Probably the pace is to slow for their liking and both asked the pentagon what could be done. Aircraft will not have a decisive effect.
5000+ artillery rounds per day for 20 months which are even better at dealing with trenches and counter battery fire would likely make a huge difference.
Would more than double Ukraines firepower untill the production ramp up is complete. Cluster ammunition is illegal according to Geneve (Not to be confused with cluster mines, which are legal if the mines themselves are. Aka: Self destructive AT mines), so we won't see Ukraine deploy that, no. It's also incredibly shitty to do on your own home soil, because your own population are the ones who have to suffer for it after the war is over. Dismantling cluster ammunition for other uses is a great way to get rid of them 1. Wrong. The cluster munitions treaty of 2008 is seperate from the Geneva convention and only applies to states that has ratified. Which neither Ukraine, the US or Russia has done. So it's perfectly legal. 2. Yes but Ukraine has still requsted munitions (and unclear if Turkey provided some) and both sides have used them already. Also prolonged warfare is incredibly shitty for your citizens in itself and also generates UXO in vastquantities. So if it ends the war faster and is mainly used in specific areas it could end up being significantly less shitty for future generations. Also 3 mn shells and 1 mn other munitions might actually make the Russian army do a double take if they are pressured already. They know how much absurd amount of artillery fire sucks and they don't want to be on the other end of that stick.
You're right, I hadn't quite done my proper research on that subject
|
On June 24 2023 03:56 Gorsameth wrote:
No, just reading the title but that clearly says the MoD. not Putin.
This is standard dictatorship stuff. Let subordinates fight, in this case Wagner and the MoD, so that they are to busy to fight the glorious leader.
Also might be set up to shift blame for Russia's loss to the MoD instead of blaming the glorious leader
This could be the reason.
|
There's a lot of crazy claims and reports flying around right now and we should all be skeptical, at least for now. As wartranslated says: "A lot of things are being thrown around here and there about things happening in Russia but I have so far not seen a single photo or video evidence of anything, only text and audio messages."
|
On June 24 2023 05:31 PhoenixVoid wrote:There's a lot of crazy claims and reports flying around right now and we should all be skeptical, at least for now. As wartranslated says: "A lot of things are being thrown around here and there about things happening in Russia but I have so far not seen a single photo or video evidence of anything, only text and audio messages."
Then the following tweet...
edit:
edit: Unconfirmed rumors that Russian TV has been hacked and is showing Prigozhin speech... wtf is going on over there.
|
On June 24 2023 05:31 PhoenixVoid wrote:There's a lot of crazy claims and reports flying around right now and we should all be skeptical, at least for now. As wartranslated says: "A lot of things are being thrown around here and there about things happening in Russia but I have so far not seen a single photo or video evidence of anything, only text and audio messages."
I recommend using in-browser translation on this BBC Russia live thread to follow the developments. It's slower than twitter but at least they do some checking before posting.
https://www.bbc.com/russian/live/news-65849028
|
|
|
The one thing Prigozhin is good at is generating media attention. I really dislike how everything he says get reported on last few months, dude is a mercenary leader responsible for some heinous things and he's often just shouting stuff to make him and his company of killers look better, there is 0 reason to trust any of his words but all his rants get treated like prime news.
I'd say this is another of his stupid shouting matches but apparently General Surovikin has already tried to make a appeal to the wagner fighters to stop so I guess it's not all bluster this time.
Though it doesn't make any sense to me why wagner would try to announce a move against the army generals before they make the move. Just seems like a one way ticket to get bombed to shit by the airforce.
|
|
|
On June 24 2023 06:41 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
The one thing Prigozhin is good at is generating media attention. I really dislike how everything he says get reported on last few months, dude is a mercenary leader responsible for some heinous things and he's often just shouting stuff to make him and his company of killers look better, there is 0 reason to trust any of his words but all his rants get treated like prime news.
I'd say this is another of his stupid shouting matches but apparently General Surovikin has already tried to make a appeal to the wagner fighters to stop so I guess it's not all bluster this time.
Though it doesn't make any sense to me to try to announce a move against generals before you make the move. Just seems like a one way ticket to get bombed to shit.
It's an utterly suicidal coup attempt because Wagner is outnumbered and outgunned by Russia's formal military and relies heavily on the state for its logistics. Maybe Wagner has the backing of people in the Russian military, or Prigozhin was tipped off about an impending arrest and decided to gamble like Caesar. Maybe this is all smoke and mirrors for something else.
|
Whatever it is, this is wild. ;o
|
Apparently Prigozhin's troops are already inside Russia, closing on Rostov; according to him, border guards and the contract soldiers dispatched to stop them greeted them as friends and let them pass unimpeded. Pal living in Moscow is telling me military vehicles are rolling around the city setting up near Kremlin and FSB structures and such.
While under normal circumstances this would definitely be a hopeless cause, it's important to remember that majority of Russia's formal military is stuck in Ukraine, while large portions of internal security forces including Rosgvardia and such aren't very keen on sticking their necks out for Shoigu / Putin / whatever while Wagner dudes are battle hardened and pissed to the max.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
