I think we realize this... But then, a lot of more intelligent people than me are taking steps and saying it can happen (NATO).
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
I think we realize this... But then, a lot of more intelligent people than me are taking steps and saying it can happen (NATO).
Another view at the initial attack on the ships here:
Reddit - Dive into anything
www.reddit.com
I think this clarifies that it was indeed an attack and not an accident. Looks like shelling or bombing of some sort.
Oh damn, if this is not a doctored video it really looks like a shot down/tumbeling cruise missile that started all of this.
Unfortunately it seems to be an old video in the same place.
They say they hear the russian rhetoric and have countermeasures ready.
Press Headlines look different...
Yep. I know that desperate times calls for desperate measures, but let's just hope it doesn't end as a bigger internal problem in the future.
Major blow for the logistics for the South. Bringing supplies towards Mariupol from Crimea is now a lot harder.
Incidentally, for those saying we should have a ceasefire:
Log into Facebook
Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.
www.facebook.com
Ukrainian intelligence reports that in the occupied territories Russians are rounding up history books that contradict "their" version of history.
We need to keep pushing them back, before they can succeed in erasing our history is larger swathes of our land.
They are just preparing for any kind of escalation, Nothing really has changed.
Some questions about the area I've been wondering about:
1) How does Russia currently supply Crimea? I know there's a bridge over the Kerch Strait, but is that the major route, or is the sea route more important?
2) If the bridge is the main route, does Ukraine have a way to attack it, forcing slower resupply over water or more dangerous across the long "land bridge" they seem so desperate for? Or is it currently unfeasible due to an inability to strike or perceived high costs?
3) When does the planting season begin in Ukraine, and how much of the arable land is currently impacted by the invasion? I've heard that Ukraine is a major wheat producer and want to know if this industry will still be able to supply the civilian population, possibly even export some to support the country in other ways.
1) How does Russia currently supply Crimea? I know there's a bridge over the Kerch Strait, but is that the major route, or is the sea route more important?
2) If the bridge is the main route, does Ukraine have a way to attack it, forcing slower resupply over water or more dangerous across the long "land bridge" they seem so desperate for? Or is it currently unfeasible due to an inability to strike or perceived high costs?
3) When does the planting season begin in Ukraine, and how much of the arable land is currently impacted by the invasion? I've heard that Ukraine is a major wheat producer and want to know if this industry will still be able to supply the civilian population, possibly even export some to support the country in other ways.
I've watched threads. Doubly shit having lived in Sheffield for most of a decade at the time.
Still, refusing to act militarily against anything a dictator wants just because they *can* potentially use them is a catastrophic flaw in logic, the kind of which already lead to the previous world war, and the idea that you can continue doing nothing is just as naive as the idiots that handwave nuclear war as it might not be that bad.
Well, it is good that we are not seeing it from Atkins here then.
1) The bridge is the main supply artery. International ship aren't allowed to dock in Crimea (b/c sanctions) and Russia doesn't have the fleet to supply it well.
2) destroying the bridge could cause long-term risks to the navigation in the Kerch straight. in peacetime, Ukraine relies on the Azov Sea ports (Berdyansk, Mariupol) for exports of steel and other metal products. Plugging up the sea with the ruins of the collapsed bridge could block that, requiring a complex and costly dredging operation. It's something Ukraine will address once they get Crimea back.
3) Planting pre-season is starting. Somewhere between 2/3s to 3/4s of the arable land is available- farmers in the occupied Kherson and Zaporizhya oblast are trying to plant as well. Exact amount of available land is unclear, due to potential threats of landmines in the fields.
-that being said, Ukrainian government will be buying the bulk of grains produce this year, and it's unclear how much excess supply there will be.
-Also, the main grain terminals are in the Black Sea ports (Odessa, Ochakiv, Mykolayiv, Kherson)- and movement in and out is currently blockaded by Russian fleet- which could prevent export of grains even if they are produced in sufficient amounts.
1) Russian Black Sea ports and the Bridge, i believe.
2) I'm not sure if Ukraine can do it, or even want to attack the bridge.
3) I don't believe there is alot of farming happening during war and martial law.
I learned that several filled export ships are hold in the harbor by russian warships.
The world will feel the consequences.
I wonder what was that:
It's not the monster from Cloverfield is it?
Are Azov entirely in Mariupol or do they have multiple units fighting in various places? Because if they're all in Mariupol, then it's highly likely none of them will come out of this war alive and free and fears of their influence will be moot. I'd have thought they were targets #1 for the Russians so they can claim they successfully did a de-Nazification or whatever.
They are trying to suppress the Pro-Ukranian activists in Kherson and Melitopol, which is bad.
This is why Ukraine can't afford to slow down tempo.
Deleted member 44122
Guest
Yes.
Russia, with the help of South Africa just made a circus out of the UN.
South Africa presented a resolution that was written by Russia, the resolution from yesterdays Security Council that failed.
A Yes on that resolution would have blocked the resolution on the aggression of Russia, and would put it neutral.
EDIT:
But it failed, and the resolution against Russia was adopted.
So right leaning people with controversial views can be permanently purged from twitter but the Russian Government is allowed to spread their completely false propaganda for an illegal war that is killing thousands of innocent people?
Great job Twitter.
That's what happens when a ship full of ammo starts exploding. Rounds or shrapnel from the ship itself will fly out and land somewhere.I wonder what was that:
The problem is that most of this is word salad that cannot point to any specific meaning. What was the "plan"? What territories have been liberated? In what way has life been returning to normal? Even the photo is just a stock image. There's nothing to refute because nothing has been reported.
Why?
The staff instructions read "This isn't the place to speculate about nuclear war and the horrors tied to it."
Based on that I think it is more appropriate to punish all the posters who insist that any suggestion the U.S. or NATO may respond militarily if Putin crosses certain lines is the equivalent of wanting the end of the world.
Sounds like you want one-sided moderation on this issue.
Sounds almost like they're preparing their own off ramp (I wish). Mission accomplished! Style of thing
Yeah, NATO engages in scare tactics too. Clear threats of "if you escalate to X we will respond" are part of the game, even when that escalation isn't actually imminent.
This kinda feels like a goal of theirs. Just circle wagons on the information sphere of their people, claim that they achieved all goals and won, and go home.
Sure, the RU citizens will eventually figure it out when they actually try to enter Ukraine and realize its not actually theirs but hey, thats the risk I suppose.
With as even more poorly as Russia seems to be defending their maritime assets than their ground/air stuff, I wonder if their exist any sort of drone torpedoes/mines. Seems like if you could just strap some electric screws to a mine, weigh it down to just below the surface, and sneak a control crew anywhere along that coastline near that dock, all they'd have to do is guide it anywhere close to a ship and blow it. Modern naval vessels have no armor to speak of, just a practically paper thin hull. The USS Cole was an unfortunate demonstration of this. Maybe something like this wouldn't outright sink a ship, but could put it out of action for the rest of the invasion. I have doubts that even if the Russians have significant ASW capability, they're actually exercising any detection at the moment, given that Ukraine ostensibly has no submarines.
I would imagine the Switchblades would do just fine. The light ones would have a field day with exposed ammo crates, while the heavier ones could punch a decent hole in the hull.
Posturing like this is important but also inherently de-escalatory in the grand scheme of things. I can see why it causes panic for some.
Its worse. I'm not logged into my twitter on my Work PC and clicking the tweet shows "similar" tweets from right leaning pro Russian accounts that are just as disgusting and pushing propaganda.
It's important to make it clear that Putin cannot take Europe's reaction to him using WMD's for granted. Because I don't think he can. Any significant deployment of chemical or biological weapons on European soil risks sending public opinion to the boiling point, and politicians would be forced to act. Russia is not the only party here one should be careful not to threaten too much.
Let's just say the quiet part out loud: literally half of the political machinery in this country has been co-opted by Putin, his Oligarchs, and the Kremilin. We are in a full on domestic political dystopia here in the U.S. due to subversive propaganda and monetary funding of compromised political assets / mafiosos (see Trump and his wing of the GOP) by the Russians.
Between the British talking about longer range targeting, and the Americans specifically mentioning anti-ship missiles, it does feel like part of the shifting NATO thinking as they move away from prepping Ukraine for an insurgency and towards arming them for a conventional war is that maybe it would be a nice knock-on effect of this whole thing if Ukraine managed to sink a decent chunk of the Black Sea fleet during this war
Bit off topic but UK took a major intelligence operation to stop Argentina from acquiring more Exocet anti-ship missiles.They genuinely feared for their aircraft carriers if Argentina had more.Would make for a great spy movie tbh.
Just occurred to me that the destroyed ship pretty much blocks that port from being used too