I honestly dont see Russia invading the Ukraine, it's much easier to keep the Americans on their toes and just sit and do nothing.
All we've had is speculation, the Russians are going to do this, the Russians are going to do that, the Russians are poised to invade and its days away.
It was days away weeks ago.
.
The UK has given the Ukraine some ATGM's, like those are magic and couldnt be attacked in any other ways, from the air for example.They can also be jammed, and modern tank armour is pretty impressive against anti tank weapons.. And how many did we give them ? 10, a 100 ?. Russia probably has more Tanks on the border than missiles we could supply, so why give them.
Maybe NATO is hoping some drunken Ukrainian is going to kick things off themselves.
But personally, with the exception of the lone nut, nobody really wants to start anything.
I honestly dont see Russia invading the Ukraine,
They invaded Crimea and other border regions years ago. The question is, to what degree will Putin escalate the invasion that has already occurred. Putin has put himself in a position where he cannot back down. NATO rejected his demands, if he doesn't respond, he looks weak.
The UK has given the Ukraine some ATGM’s, like those are magic and couldnt be attacked in any other ways, from the air for example.They can also be jammed, and modern tank armour is pretty impressive against anti tank weapons.. And how many did we give them ? 10, a 100 ?. Russia probably has more Tanks on the border than missiles we could supply, so why give them.
Ukraine doesn't have an effective air force, the only way they can fight tanks is with ground launched missiles. Those missiles can also be used to attack fortified emplacements so they aren't purely an anti-tank weapon. Modern anti-tank missiles are fire-and-forget and attack the tank from above, not from the sides. They have a two-stage warhead. The first stage triggers the explosive armour, the second stage is intended to penetrate the conventional armour under that.
If the missiles were ineffective, there'd be no reason for Russia to be upset about supplying them to Ukraine. It's not necessary to destroy every enemy tank to render them less effective. If the Russians know that Ukraine has modern anti-tank missiles, they will be forced to adjust their tactics accordingly, which constrains their tactical and strategic options. Russia may have a lot of tanks, but they can't deploy them all to Ukraine - they still need troops and armour along their other borders. The U.S. has tens of thousands of anti-tank missiles so they can supply Ukraine with enough missiles to make a full-scale invasion very costly for Russia. Ukraine could not withstand a full-scale invasion by Russia, but they could make it a very costly victory.
Is the Crimea not where the Russian Black Sea fleet lives ?, so completely understandable and i expect any superpower would have done the same if it meant having 'enemies'(loose term) in that area.
If the missiles were ineffective
I'm not saying they're totally ineffective, but as powerful and useful as they are, the small amount that the UK is supplying isnt going to last long against the Russian army, and then what ?. Wait till the US or whomever supplies more. I'm not sure they could get them there in time to do any good as Russia would certainly launch an all out assault and overrun airports and more than likely Ukrainian positions.
Thats the thing people seem to forget, they think its Hollywood and nobody runs out. Ships, be they destroyers, frigates or carriers have a finite supply and when thats expended, that ship or whatever needs to retire. I doont think theres a carrier afloat that can sustain itself for more that a fortnight,maybe 3 weeks before they run out of supplies. In a battle the Ordnance is going to run out a lot faster
Theres 26 Airports spread throughout Ukraine, but with Russian forces to the north,east and south that leaves only about 5, and i dont see them being of much use when by that time Russia is occupying 2/3 of the country.
As ever, its the airports in these things that become the targets first. No airport = no resupply.
But as i said. Nothing is going to happen. Russia isnt going to invade.
I’m not saying they’re totally ineffective, but as powerful and useful as they are, the small amount that the UK is supplying isnt going to last long against the Russian army, and then what ?.
We don't know the number the UK is prepared to supply, let alone what other countries like the US may have supplied.
Wait till the US or whomever supplies more. I’m not sure they could get them there in time to do any good as Russia would certainly launch an all out assault and overrun airports and more than likely Ukrainian positions.
You're assuming there's none stockpiled in neighbouring NATO countries
As ever, its the airports in these things that become the targets first. No airport = no resupply.
Whilst air re-supply would be optimal we're not talking about the Falklands here - you could easily and effectively resupply by land. If Russia goes beyond the Donbas they're going to get bogged down, this won't be a 2-3 day skirmish with Ukraine being overrun.
We're also not sure what air defence systems Ukraine has in place - if Russia can't effectively use it's air force (especially in ground support roles) they'll likely take a lot of losses (beyond the Donbas anyway).
But as i said. Nothing is going to happen. Russia isnt going to invade.
Hopefully not but as has been said, what's Putin's next move? It can't be cheap keeping 100k troops at the Ukrainian border and he's talked himself into a position he can't back down from without appearing weak. If he hadn't previously invaded the Crimea I'd be a lot more sceptical about a Russian invasion now.
Escalating cyber activity isn't a good sign either, I don't believe it's all (or even mostly) being carried out by independent Russian patriots. It's sanctioned and likely orchestrated by Russian intelligence (along with them being directly involved). Even the recent Revil arrests seem to be just a distraction tactic to me, letting Russia say "see, we're cooperating in hunting down cyber criminals" whereas in fact Revil was already largely defunct and Russia are secretly coordinating with other groups on cyber attacks against Ukraine.
Only had time to read the first third but I agree, it's really well written!
Ben Wallace (uk defence secretary) has released a statement on the situation and I’m surprised (shocked?) as to how well it is written.
That was a good read, cheers.
All we’ve had is speculation, the Russians are going to do this, the Russians are going to do that, the Russians are poised to invade and its days away.
It was days away weeks ago.
I don't think your Facebook feed is helping you. The slightly obvious massing you can see from space isn't just speculation.
The delay is related to weather, the urgency related to conscripts going home on the normal rotation. There's also the calculations Putin is doing on what he will gain/risk.
I’m not saying they’re totally ineffective, but as powerful and useful as they are, the small amount that the UK is supplying isnt going to last long against the Russian army, and then what ?
I imagine they know this, tha calculation is they add to the likely losses if Putin invades and changes his calculations. The cumulative impact of strengthening with this that and the other. It's that old concept called deterrence.
Maybe
NATOPutin is hoping some drunken Ukrainian is going to kick things off themselves.
FIFY
I don’t think it was the West’s military might that won the Cold War.
Yes and no. The US intentionally did things that increased the amount that the USSR had to spend on defence like recommissioning WW2 battleships with very thick armour which required the USSR to develop the capability to defeat the armour and Star Wars. It didn't matter if Star Wars was never going to work, it required the USSR to do their own research. Before YouTube, so expensive 😉
I went to Moscow twice - once in 1989 so pre the breakup of the USSR, on the way through to China, once in 1997 to work for 4 months. The difference was amazing. In 1989 their were shortages of everything, queues for e.g. shampoo. In 1997 everything was available if you had money but lots of people didn't. The people I worked with (ex Space City and ex KGB) were somewhere in the middle. They liked the freedom, didn't like the inequality.
My Russian friends (living in England) took their teenage kids to Russia for a long summer holiday just before COVID. The kids were keen to see the motherland. The parents wanted to show them how much better England is. The kids came back convinced that England was a better place to live.
The kids came back convinced that England was a better place to live.
Ukrainians have come to the same conclusion about not wanting to live in Russia.
I think (Dyna-Ti) you underestimate the Ukraininans quite a lot. Yes, they've bought anti tank missiles form the UK, they've also bought them from the US and others, anti aircraft missiles and anti tank drones from the Turks, and enough of them. The drones are a particular concern to the russians as they've been used recently and demonstrated to be effective against Russina armour (syria)
Also - have you looked at a map of the Ukraine - resupply is plenty possible. If putin invades to support his mother Russia fantasy it will be limited, to minimise getting bogged down. You aren't going to see hundreds of tanks rolling along while a couple of hundred Ukrainian POW's stand around in 1950's gear.
Putin CAN'T get bogged down... it accelerates the possibility of the south kicking off again, and this time uncontrollably. Common sense says he doesn't invade... but common sense might not be the decider to a man on a crusasde
It's all rather worrying.
Was reading into some discussion on this yesterday, apparently one of the key reasons the Russians haven't crossed the border yet is that they're having a really mild, wet Winter over there and any attempt to move heavy armour through all that mud in Easten Ukraine be a nightmare.
If they get a cold snap soon and the ground freezes,it's game on. This is why the invasion's been 'days away' for weeks now.
The Ukrainians are fully aware of their situation and are already planning to resist initially and then switch to guerilla tactics, guerilla insurgencies are hard to deal with even when they're impromtu and some of the population are friendly (the US in Iraq for example).
In Ukraine the insurgency will be planned, backed by the government, trained in advance, well equipped and supported by almost every member of the public, it'll get very very nasty, very quickly.
Putin CAN’T get bogged down… it accelerates the possibility of the south kicking off again,
Oh and this is a great point, if Putin does go into Ukraine, then it's pretty likely Chechnya will kick off again. Kazakhstan is already in tumult and Putin is committed to helping there. Georgia probably won't be far behind.
Hence why he can't afford to get bogged dowm, hence why the new Ukrainan defence doctrine is likely to be effective.
Question guys..?
Turkey has a tenuous relationship with Russia and is in NATO of course.
I'm surprised they have helped Ukraine with the drones, seems a pretty forthright FU to Putin? Doesnt this go against their general policy towards Russia?
Educate me.
Turkey's economy is down the toilet - 36% inflation, all the serious economists already sacked by the government for disagreeing with policies that were bound to screw the economy. They need the cash, their drones are battle proven in Syria, I suspect they will sell to anyone.
Re NATO, they are a member but they're not getting access to advance technology like the F35 because of their purchase of Russian radar. Back in the cold war they were very useful as a base for missiles and planes - same distance to Moscow as from Berlin, much closer to the industry beyond the Urals. Now I'm not sure how vital they are to NATO.
Just reading about Turkish drone use in Syria - Putin could really get a bloody nose if Ukraine buys enough of them
https://www.mei.edu/publications/fight-syrias-skies-turkey-challenges-russia-new-drone-doctrine
Doesnt this go against their general policy towards Russia?
I'm pretty sure Erdogan sees Turkey as being on equal terms with Russia in terms of sociopolitical might (I know) and therefore feels that he can do whatever he likes
Turks and Russian grumbling go back along way. Turkey need cash plain and simple but they don't need a Russia that's getting close. turkey needs to control the black sea and keep the lanes open.
The Ukraine Parliament was given a vip tour of turkey last week I assume to stick two fingers up to Putin.
Also a giggle that Thay are considering Bitcoin to get them out of the inflation spiral.
The Globemasters are still flying in too. Also the Russian embassy is being emptied of staff if you believe the internet.
It's hard to see Putin backing down without losing face within the Kremlin circle.
Hopes pinned on the German talks pulling a cat out of a bag
The Assad regime suffered heavy losses as a result of the drone campaign: 3,000 soldiers, 151 tanks, eight helicopters, three drones, three fighter jets (including two Russian-made Sukhoi Su-24s), around 100 armored military vehicles and trucks, eight aerial defense systems, 86 cannons and howitzers, ammunition trucks and dumps, and one headquarters, among other military equipment and facilities.
Putin could really get a bloody nose if Ukraine buys enough of them
You're not wrong!!
the small amount that the UK is supplying isnt going to last long against the Russian army, and then what ?.
From the U.K. it’s “thousands”
The British military gave Ukraine thousands of anti-tank missiles this week to use in the event of an invasion by Moscow.
I don’t know what counts as a small amount, but they’ll be getting kit from elsewhere too. No idea if they actually know how to use it.
No idea if they actually know how to use it.
Can't remember if it was someone on here or an article that said we would send army to train them.
Time to test out new weapons in this region first before the mother of all wars start with CCP in future.
Latest move by Russia
" According to AIS data from marinetraffic.com, five Ropucha-class landing ships and one Ivan Gren-class landing ship have been dispatched from Russia's Baltic fleet. It is believed the ships are en route towards the English Channel."
Just a routine patrol through international waters. Who knows, maybe they'll do a tour of the UK, sailing in international waters.
They might even anchor and conduct some tests.
Thats not provocative is it ?.
---------------
No Im not underestimating the Ukraine. But I reckon many here are over estimating their ability, US/UK supplied or not.
@Big'n'Daft
Im not on facebook.
What are they going to land and where are they going to land it?
What are they going to land and where are they going to land it?
Probably heading for the Black Sea.
Speculation in some of the tabloids comments sections is of an invasion of the UK 😆
Speculation in some of the tabloids comments sections is of an invasion of the UK
https://blogs.bl.uk/magnificentmaps/2017/02/soviet-military-mapping-of-the-cold-war-era.html
No Im not underestimating the Ukraine. But I reckon many here are over estimating their ability, US/UK supplied or not.
It's not about ability, it's about willingness to fight, Ukraine grew up in the Donbas
Watch the 93rd Brigade stuff on YouTube, if IT consultant's from Kiev were getting their hands dirty as ideological volunteers then the country has changed and it's citizens prepared to fight and unfortunately die
@Big’n’Daft
Im not on facebook.
Makes me wonder where you get your tripe from? 50 cent brigade?
Time to test out new weapons in this region first before the mother of all wars start with CCP in future.
Not that new, more sell the Ukrainians short shelf life munitions cheaply as they are likely to use them
NLAW has been around for a while, hopefully it's easier to shoot than LAW 94 which was an awful first time experience
Makes me wonder where you get your tripe from?
No need to be abusive
Or its that the argument winner in your book. If you disagree then say that. Throwing insults out just makes me think you're a (Insert swear word here)
Throwing insults out just makes me think you’re a (Insert swear word here)
I think you views on this issue are tripe, sometimes people take offence when you say this. I'm sure you are a perfectly nice person in real life who is capable of holding a discussion with people who say their view on a particular issue are tripe.
Or you can take it personally and call me rude names
Sorry which views ?
That the Ukraine is in an impossible position, having thrown their lot in with nato, being well aware of how Russia feels about its border security ?
Or is it that if anything does kick off, that Ukraine is f*****d with many thousands losing their lives on both sides because of American policy of crowding in on Russia.
Perhaps even that by arming the Ukrainians Britain is placing itself, and us in danger of retaliation from a superpower who has the ability to snuff us out. There are only a few real superpowers now, and we aint one of them.
Or is it because im not on facebook, although just a couple of posts back on that you were accusing me of getting wrong info FROM facebook.
How many times have we heard this from the US. Its Russia, its China,It's Syria, its Iran, its this country, and that country. Russia is a big superpower, with all the military toys the US has. And here are we playing piggy in the middle to the detriment of ourselves and the Ukrainian people.
So according to your tripe- (Or point of view, if you would prefer i use a term that is less argumentative), being on facebook is false info, but not being on facebook is also false info.
So whats that about ?.On my opinion, which obviously differs from yours, though it seems like you think im some sort of pro Russia stooge.
At no point have I disagreed with your stance, yet you're the one going on the attack. Sorry buddy but care to explain, or are you ex military and this is your usual point of view. Out with the pitchforks for any dissenting voices querying how crazily stupid Ukrainian leadership is being, and why in Christs name the UK are stirring the pot.
Say for example Scotland gained independence and joined the CSTO, and being part of that placed a military base on the border with England. Would England be ok with that ?. Or would they place their own troops there, and two armies that close is a recipe for disaster.
I'll remind you this is purely hypothetical, so lets not have another rant on those specifics and stick to the basic premise.
I am hoping HOPING nothing happens. Others seem to self assured that Britain's role in America's game is the best route, when clearly it isnt. We should be hounding out own government to stay well out of this, not flying the Rule Britannia flag,
But anyway. Its not about my opinion, or yours, so perhaps a bit of civility is best eh.
I'll see if i can track down someone I know who's Ukrainian and ask what he thinks.
You are the one that thinks NATO is an offensive alliance deliberately antagonising Russia
That's tripe, as is
of American policy of crowding in on Russia.
It doesn't exist
Perhaps even that by arming the Ukrainians Britain is placing itself, and us in danger of retaliation from a superpower who has the ability to snuff us out. There are only a few real superpowers now, and we aint one of them.
Does Russia dictate where sovereign states can trade arms? Maybe we belong to NATO because of the Russian threat.
So you think the Ukraine should just accept their lot as a slave state of the USSR?
.
Never knew STW forum had this many tank commanders, war lords, military strategists and military generals. Great entertainment.
I learned everything I know from Red Alert
So you think the Ukraine should just accept their lot as a slave state of the USSR ?
Sorry ?? What ?? Who said that ?
Thats one of those damned if you do damned if you dont questions isnt it. I've given neither opinion on that question, but if you want me, to have an opinion on that, Ukraine should be it's own country.
That ok, that fair. Or should i have another opinion that suits your questioning.
@Big'n'Daft
Why has the US got 800 military bases spread about the world ?
Sightseeing perhaps 😆
On a minor note, as I understand it, referring to Ukraine as "the Ukraine" is nowadays incorrect and seems to be considered somewhat insulting by Ukrainians.
Or is it that if anything does kick off, that Ukraine is f*****d with many thousands losing their lives on both sides because of American policy of crowding in on Russia.
That's not what's happening at all. Ukrainians booted out a corrupt leader who had ties to Russia and favoured closer ties with the EU. Putin took this snub very badly and invaded Ukraine, annexing Crimea and border areas. Ukraine has severe problems with corruption and economic mismanagement and has no hope of joining the EU and NATO until those are dealt with. So, it's not that the U.S. is trying to crowd Russia, it's that Russia's neighbours are afraid of it and are looking to Europe for something better. This is on Putin, not the U.S.
as I understand it, referring to Ukraine as “the Ukraine” is nowadays incorrect and seems to be considered somewhat insulting by Ukrainians.
I learned everything I know from Red Alert
In which case you know that Ukraine has cheaper supply lines and can walk all over Russia. Maybe that's why Putin has an Inf-zerg building up on the border!
Tesla coils?
Why has the US got 800 military bases spread about the world ?
Lots of reasons I imagine, although the number is inaccurate and the definition of a "lillypad" used to boost it to sell the book. I really don't think they are looking to lay siege. Quite the reverse, Russia has challenged freedom of navigation not the US.
The reality of the US in Ukraine is probably close to this, with a likelihood that numbers may swell to speed up any evacuation of US citizens
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220119-russians-pose-threat-to-us-training-mission-in-ukraine
Well its an interesting list of foreign bases per country.
Russia has 13. France has 15, Australia was 2, Turkey has 10, Britain has 16, Canada has 4, Italy has 4, India has 5, and the US was 800.
Hmmmmm, bit of a disparity going on there, but hey, that doesn't mean to say the US is an aggressive country.
😆 😆
Perhaps even that by arming the Ukrainians Britain is placing itself, and us in danger of retaliation from a superpower who has the ability to snuff us out. There are only a few real superpowers now, and we aint one of them.
I am not sure Russia has enough tugboats to tow their navy to Britain.
Putins sabre rattling is all about domestic politics, he needs foreign distractions to make him look strong because he is presiding over a domestic policy disaster. Even imprisoning and killing all his rivals is starting to wear thin.
Unfortunately the idiot Biden has left him a path to make a "minor incursion" so he can sell his strongman image in Russia while the west just impose a few more futile sanctions while buying all the gas they can take.
Sure it wasn't a deliberate slip. Biden has been at this game for a very long time.
and the US was 800.
Probably 550 of them in Iraq and Afghanistan.
800 averages about 4 per UN member which is why it's a number designed to illicit a particular response rather than inform on US bases abroad
Unfortunately the idiot Biden has left him a path to make a “minor incursion” so he can sell his strongman image in Russia while the west just impose a few more futile sanctions while buying all the gas they can take.
That might be the NATO calculus, unfortunately Ukrainians paying with their lives to keep Putin in power and western Europe warm with the lights on
Why has the US got 800 military bases spread about the world ?
In reality, they don't. That number will include a bunch of tiny outposts that aren't really a base in the sense of being a viable stand-alone entity. In countries like South Korea and Japan, there ae multiple bases - naval, airforce, and marine corps. Those bases are there because the governments of those countries want U.S. troops on their soil to deter Russia, China, and North Korea. Many countries are ambivalent about the U.S. but having a defense treaty with the U.S. and some bases is much preferable to being left to deal with Russia or China on their own. Russia and China don't have bases all over the world because they are not welcome whereas the U.S. is tolerated.
And if you counted Wagner et al I suspect Russian bases would be in the hundreds in Africa alone, not 13 globally 😉
A significant portion of the Ukrainian population have done time fighting and are willing to fight. The joke that was Ukrainian military has changed as has the willingness to fight. Any invasion will see an intolerable number of body bags going back to mother Russia
Ask a Russian about how successful they were during the Winter War with overwhelming odds on their side…
I suspect im not the only one on here or irl that's getting up each morning and clicking on the news half expecting the breaking story to be that Russia has invaded Ukraine.
Same as it ever was, the little people die to fulfill the ego and power struggles of the rich and powerful.
half expecting the breaking story to be that Russia has invaded Ukraine.
Russia invaded Ukraine several years ago. What you mean is that they escalate the invasion.
^^ You know what I mean.
I have a question: Is it normal for an invading army to gather in their hundreds of thousands at the border of the intended invadee and then just sit there, waiting? It's been weeks!! It's not exactly preserving the element of surprise...
They never would have had the element of surprise anyway. Apparently, part of it is waiting for the ground to freeze so that vehicles don't get bogged down in mud. They also need time to ship tens of thousands of tonnes of equipment around. On top of that, Putin has attempted to use this as a negotiating tactic to force concessions out of NATO. To do that, he had to openly make preparations for a large-scale invasion so that NATO knew he had something to exchange. The element of surprise is whether they will escalate, where, and to what degree.
I think it's an issue of intimidation tactics and a mild, therefore muddy, winter preventing a swift invasion.
Desert Storm was hardly a surprise attack. As above, the obvious build up was a tactic to try to get the other side to back down
I have a question: Is it normal for an invading army to gather in their hundreds of thousands at the border of the intended invadee and then just sit there, waiting? It’s been weeks!! It’s not exactly preserving the element of surprise…
The problem is massing troops on a border looks pretty much the same whether it's being done to force a conciliation on something or as a prelude to invasion (e.g. Iraq and the Kuwait invasion).
If Russia does invade it will likely be a combination of Spetsnaz airborne/seaborne (these guys aren't the ones massing at the border - in fact many are reportedly in Ukraine already as Ukraine doesn't have control of the much of the Donbas). The troops massing on the border are the expendable (to Putin) conscripts who will grind their way in to reinforce the Spetsnaz as the second wave. If Putin's intent is a full-scale invasion then the third wave will be reinforcements (better trained and equipped than the second wave) going in through Belarus, Crimea and Russia. Or I could just be talking bollocks :p
…China don’t have bases all over the world because they are not welcome whereas the U.S. is tolerated.
The CCP just buy influence and power with investment trade deals etc around the world which is probably a lot easier.
The CCP just buy influence and power with investment trade deals etc around the world which is probably a lot easier.
The U.S. has been doing that for decades too. Their global power isn't purely military force, most of it is economic.
I'm guessing there will be a move by Russia to "secure" Donbas. Putin will try and sell this as protecting the Russian population and as a way of ending the ongoing conflict in the region. There will also be statements that Russia won't go any further, limited operation, nothing to see here etc etc.
Alexander Vindman thinks a full-on Russian assault is most likely.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ukraine/2022-01-21/day-after-russia-attacks
Alexander Vindman thinks a full-on Russian assault is most likely.
Was he rubbing his hands with glee at the time ?.
I've never really been a viewer of Tucker or Fox news, but at least they're saying what it is.
Tucker Carlson talks a lot of shit, a lot of the time. I’m not even going to give that Trumpist culture war cock bag a play as his usual barrage of misinformation is not how I want to start the weekend, but does the video paint Democrats/current administration in a very bad ligh?
Actually, what happened to last years $2.7 billion law suit against Fox by Smartmatic, went in November time iirc?
I’m not even going to give that Trumpist culture war cock bag a play as his usual barrage of misinformation is not how I want to start the weekend, but does the video paint Democrats/current administration in a very bad light?
He seems to be talking more about the military war machine. But yes there's some anti democrat stuff in there (To be expected.)
Sorry, I should have been less ranty. But just to say Carlson is a massively unreliable and a hopelessly biased “commentator” and it’s definitely not news. It’s how he has so far got away with some of the stuff he says, as it’s “opinion” not “fact”.
I have him about on par with Neil Oliver on vaccines.
The headline from BnDs link
Fox News won a court case by 'persuasively' arguing that no 'reasonable viewer' takes Tucker Carlson seriously
Tucker Carlson talks a lot of shit,
a lotall of the time.
FTFY. It's his business model. He just says whatever outrageous bullshit keeps his audience riled up. He's a smart guy and he knows he's talking shit, but he also knows he can make a lot of money by talking shit.
Honestly, if you want to find some alternative viewpoints on this, go visit Reporters Sans Frontiers, pick a few countries from the top of the list and see what’s on they’re news.
You will still likely end up with a European perspective, but we also tend not to kill many journalists, which has a large part in the ranking. US media can be pretty nuts too, flicking from Fox to CNN is some hell of a jump of viewpoints.
BBC News - Ukraine: US orders families of embassy staff to leave
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60106416
It's not looking good
"Top German Navy officer Vice Adm. Kay-Achim Schönbach said that the idea that Russia seeks to seize additional territory from Ukraine is "nonsense."
You would think he would be best placed to make such a comment.
You would think he would be best placed to make such a comment.
He does seem very familiar with nonsense. He's just spouting the German official line. Germany just wants to pretend that this isn't happening and that they'll be able to keep importing Russian gas and exporting stuff there. Germany is in denial about reality on this.
Hmmm, what are the Russki’s up to?
Hmmm, what are the Russki’s up to?
And how exactly would they know the capabilities of such a ship. I dont think they print that type of stuff in the local Russian library under - Spy Ship Plans.
And given theres so many, you pretty much cant sail anywhere without crossing over at least one.
The New York Times today issued an extraordinary mea culpa over its coverage of Iraq, admitting it had been misled about the presence of weapons of mass destruction.
New York Post Archives.
And how exactly would they know the capabilities of such a ship.
It's called "espionage". Each country photographs the shit out of every military vehicle, ship, and aircraft belonging to other countries every chance they get. Those are analyzed by experts who pore over every detail. They also gather electromagnetic and infrared emissions and analyze those for clues, plus seabed microphones to gather acoustic emissions, and so forth. On top of that, defectors or spies might provide detailed technical details. Just getting dockworkers drunk and letting them blabber away will give details about operational matters. Figuring out that a ship is designed to cut undersea cables would not be as difficult as you imagine.
It’s called “espionage”.
Yup this is true.
But when you know about such information it's prudent not to let on you know what they have,and printing it in the main newspapers throws that into a cocked hat.
I read a case years ago about a secret US aircraft. It was top top secret, even congress didnt know it existed.
Until a local model company released it as a kit.
They while picking up plans for aircraft for their models were inadvertently given the secret plans as well.
But when you know about such information it’s prudent not to let on you know what they have,and printing it in the main newspapers throws that into a cocked hat.
Yes and no. Disclosing what you know about another nation's activities can let them know that they are being watched and deter them from doing it. It's not always such a big deal to disclose intelligence unless drawn from covert human sources.
The cable cutting, or at least getting caught doing it, does seem to be a Russian speciality. Their vessels have been spotted close to areas where cables have been 'damaged'. There was one up in Sweden last week that was almost certainly conducted by the Russians. So not a biggie to say: "We know what your ship can do and we know where it is and where it has been".