EPTRusso-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 496
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4692 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
LONDON (AP) — Russia halted a breakthrough wartime deal on Monday that allows grain to flow from Ukraine to countries in Africa, the Middle East and Asia where hunger is a growing threat and high food prices have pushed more people into poverty. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia would suspend the Black Sea Grain Initiative until its demands to get its own food and fertilizer to the world are met. While Russia has complained that restrictions on shipping and insurance have hampered its agricultural exports, it has shipped record amounts of wheat since last year. “When the part of the Black Sea deal related to Russia is implemented, Russia will immediately return to the implementation of the deal,” Peskov said. The suspension marks the end of an accord that the U.N. and Turkey brokered last summer to allow food to leave the Black Sea region after Russia’s invasion of its neighbor worsened a global food crisis. The initiative is credited with helping lower soaring prices of wheat, vegetable oil and other food commodities. Ukraine and Russia are both major global suppliers of wheat, barley, sunflower oil and other affordable food products that developing nations rely on. The suspension of the deal sent wheat prices up about 3% in Chicago trading, to $6.81 a bushel, still about half what they were last year during last year’s peaks, but fell later in the day. Analysts don’t expect more than a temporary bump to global food commodity prices because places like Russia and Brazil have ratcheted up wheat and corn exports. But food insecurity worldwide is growing as developing countries also struggle with climate change, conflict and economic crises. Finding suppliers outside Ukraine that are farther away also could raise costs. Source edit: Yep seems like Turkey has said they are going along despite what Russia say or not. So either Turkey send it's own ships, military escorted obviously to keep the Grain ships moving. Or Russia comes back to the table. | ||
KwarK
United States42004 Posts
If Turkey provides an escort Putin wouldn’t be stupid enough to fire on that escort with his third rate navy. If he did decide to play that game Erdogan won’t hesitate to sink said navy, assuming they don’t accidentally catch fire by themselves. If that were to happen Putin would back down like the pussy he is because Turkey is a regional power with a large and powerful conventional army under the aegis of NATO. And while NATO is a defensive alliance it’ll still absolutely cover a fight started by Russian ships shelling a grain convoy under Turkish protection. Which is, of course, to say none of that will actually happen because everyone knows how it’ll end. Putin has talked a big game on escalation with the west but every single time he has been forced to make a choice he has given in because he knows exactly how outmatched he is. Incidentally the June 2020 internal Russian report on the condition of the Moskva makes for fun reading. The sailors kept stealing and selling the fire extinguishers and so the last handful of the 600 that were meant to be on board were put in one place and locked up to keep them safe. Also the comms system jammed the radar system so they could either see or communicate what they saw but not both. And that was the flagship. This is not a scary navy. | ||
|
Gordredcasinotimon
2 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Ardias
Russian Federation605 Posts
On July 18 2023 04:14 JimmiC wrote: The Russian deputy prime minister is saying traffic one way on the bridge will restart on sept 15 and two way on Nov first. And that train traffic will not be impacted. Not sure how much this will impact the war effort with trains still running, but it can not help and it will sure make living there even less comfortable. Crimea lived 4 years in a water and electrical blockade without the bridge. They managed somehow. Also there is a land corridor to Crimea now, plus landing ships of Black Sea Fleet also help with traffic of the important cargo (they dont have to do much anyway). So it would impact tourist activity, but I don't think civilian or especially military cargo supply will be affected much. Also damage seems to be quite less than the last time (though this is explainable, last time there was a full truck of explosive stuff). | ||
|
Excludos
Norway7964 Posts
On July 18 2023 00:40 KwarK wrote: And while NATO is a defensive alliance it’ll still absolutely cover a fight started by Russian ships shelling a grain convoy under Turkish protection. That's A5 territory, tho I'm not sure they'd want to pull that particular plug, when they can just sink the entire Russian navy in retribution and call it a day instead Putin is pretty dumb, but even I would be surprised if he's that dumb. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway7964 Posts
On July 18 2023 04:14 JimmiC wrote: The Russian deputy prime minister is saying traffic one way on the bridge will restart on sept 15 and two way on Nov first. And that train traffic will not be impacted. Not sure how much this will impact the war effort with trains still running, but it can not help and it will sure make living there even less comfortable. He also said it was going to restart today at 9am, so I think he's just throwing random numbers into the wind and seeing what sticks. It's almost like the windows estimates: "It'll be done in 2 minutes. 3 hours. No, wait, 9 billion years. 2 seconds. 5 hours. 0 seconds... 0 seconds still... 0 seconds for another minute, and there we go, it's done" | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9107 Posts
Article 6 For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack: - on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France 2, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer; - on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer. I'm not sure I understand the final part correctly but I don't think attacking Turkish ships on Ukrainan waters counts as article 5 territory. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42004 Posts
On July 18 2023 05:18 Sent. wrote: I'm not sure I understand the final part correctly but I don't think attacking Turkish ships on Ukrainan waters counts as article 5 territory. Article 5 isn’t that formulaic. It doesn’t require a specific response, it allows them to meet and discuss what response they’ll come up with. In any event we were discussing if Putin retaliated against Turkey, not if they shot at the Turkish fleet and the Turkish fleet sunk the Russian fleet in response. An attack on Turkey itself would qualify. Turkish fleet in international waters may not but Turkey can handle itself. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria3709 Posts
| ||
|
Sermokala
United States13753 Posts
The bigger effect is psychological, the Russians can't protect their $2 billion dollar bridge. Its a symbol of Russian commitment to holding it and a massive propaganda victory when it truly is needed. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35093 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States42004 Posts
| ||
|
Sermokala
United States13753 Posts
| ||
|
zeo
Serbia6268 Posts
On July 18 2023 11:04 Gahlo wrote: I haven't looked too far into the recent happenings with the bridge, but how does his contrast with the previous attack on it that makes it a much bigger issue? 2022 was a suicide bombing that killed 5 people. This one has less victims and damage but whats interesting is the way the bridge was attacked, with a drone deployed from who knows where. From a military perspective its very insignificant, though we see from a civilian standpoint its the final nail in the grain deal coffin which brings about its own media circus. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria3709 Posts
On July 18 2023 17:29 zeo wrote: 2022 was a suicide bombing that killed 5 people. This one has less victims and damage but whats interesting is the way the bridge was attacked, with a drone deployed from who knows where. From a military perspective its very insignificant, though we see from a civilian standpoint its the final nail in the grain deal coffin which brings about its own media circus. No one knows how the Kerch bridge was destroyed last year, but it was certainly not a truck. It could've been a remote-controlled boat. So no, it was not a suicide bombing. Calling the most recent attack "militarily insignificant" is also fairly absurd. The Kerch bridge is a very important supply route. It's not the only route that exists, but that doesn't make it insignificant. Just the fact alone that Ukraine can even touch the bridge is of great relevance. Two successful strikes roughly 9 months apart means there are very serious safety issues. Just one more strike and the bridge could be rendered invalid. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway7964 Posts
On July 18 2023 19:12 Magic Powers wrote: No one knows how the Kerch bridge was destroyed last year, but it was certainly not a truck. It could've been a remote-controlled boat. So no, it was not a suicide bombing. Calling the most recent attack "militarily insignificant" is also fairly absurd. The Kerch bridge is a very important supply route. It's not the only route that exists, but that doesn't make it insignificant. Just the fact alone that Ukraine can even touch the bridge is of great relevance. Two successful strikes roughly 9 months apart means there are very serious safety issues. Just one more strike and the bridge could be rendered invalid. CCTV very clearly shows it's a truck, so saying "it's certainly not" is a bit rich. Yes, I'm aware of the BBC article claiming otherwise, but the things they see are akin to claiming bigfoot; it's just weird speculations based on what they want to see. Some waves down in the bottom corner of the video isn't a boat. It's "militarily insignificant" in that it won't stop supplies coming into the occupied regions. They really needed to take out that railway as well. The attack itself changes nothing in the war. Saying "Another attack might end the bridge" doesn't correlate to anything right now, unless said attack actually takes place. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9107 Posts
| ||
| ||
