Continuation The Russian invasion of Ukraine part 6

[pzkpfw]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

...

It seems unlikely that the propeller could be struck without the drone's tail fins also being struck but the video doesn't let us see that part of the aircraft after the impact.

I can't help wondering if the bit of the video they are not showing us is the Reaper letting go of one of its own external tanks (which use the inboard pylons) as a response to the Russian fuel dumps. Obviously a design flaw if it can hit the propeller, but I don't know if they are designed as drop tanks.

My uneducated 2 cents. Experts flame away.

[Daald]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

I'm not sure what the intention is in releasing fuel like that but assume it's either intended to stall the drone's engine or maybe mess up its airspeed readings. Anyway it looks as if the collision was clumsiness by the Russian pilot rather than intentional.

It seems unlikely that the propeller could be struck without the drone's tail fins also being struck but the video doesn't let us see that part of the aircraft after the impact.

In this video by a youtuber I like it shows the damage to the propeller.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVzLV-R_-kk

One propeller damaged and another was feathered.

[Ian Osborne]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

//Slight hijack// Apparently some historians prefer to think of WW1 and WWII as a single conflict with an unusually long ceasefire/armistice in the middle.

Not just historians. Talking about the Treaty of Versailles, French general Ferdinand Foch said, "This is not Peace. It is an Armistice for twenty years."

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Ian Osborne

Not just historians. Talking about the Treaty of Versailles, French general Ferdinand Foch said, "This is not Peace. It is an Armistice for twenty years."

General Pershing also feared not destroying the German Army would lead to Germany trying it again is a few years.

And a term..after 1939..for the years 1919 to 1939 in the UK was "The Long Weekend".

[sackett]

With a man in the loop, you could have the Predator taking not Evasive action but PROvasive action, that is, turning to ram. Pilot Officer Orcofskovitch would have a sudden problem to solve.

[Doubt]

Originally Posted by sackett

With a man in the loop, you could have the Predator taking not Evasive action but PROvasive action, that is, turning to ram. Pilot Officer Orcofskovitch would have a sudden problem to solve.

Those drones have humans flying them remotely. They are not built to maneuver like a fighter.

[Aridas]

Originally Posted by Dr.Sid

How can this be an accident ?

The collision itself could be accidental. The brazen provocation part is obviously not accidental. Whether it was done by undisciplined jackasses and/or at the behest of command is probably splitting hairs, though.

[lobosrul5]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europ...urope-64955537

Speaking of WW1 check out the MG in one of the photos in the above article. Also, read the article.

[Michel H]

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europ...urope-64955537

Speaking of WW1 check out the MG in one of the photos in the above article. Also, read the article.

I assume MG means "machine gun" in your post (?).

[pzkpfw]

Originally Posted by Michel H

I assume MG means "machine gun" in your post (?).

Don't worry, it'll work out
Maxim's will throw them out

- Sparks, I Predict

[The Don]

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europ...urope-64955537

Speaking of WW1 check out the MG in one of the photos in the above article. Also, read the article.

Chilling.

The bit you were specifically referring to in the article:

Quote:

Two nights before, the 28th Brigade was attacked by Russian infantry and tanks. In a timbered gun position below ground, the cold rain drips through the roof onto the dirt floor, and there, peering out into the bare landscape, is a Maxim belt-fed machine gun with stout iron wheels.

"It only works when there is a massive attack going on…then it really works," says Borys. "So we use it every week".

And this is how the battle for Bakhmut is being fought, as winter turns to spring in 21st Century Europe. A 19th Century weapon still mows down men by the score in the black Ukrainian earth.

...and if there was any doubt as to the value that the Russians place on the lives of the prisoner "volunteers"....

Quote:

"They are learning, they are getting cleverer, and it really freaks me out," says Dwarf. "They send out a group - five morons taken from prison. They are shot, but the enemy sees where you are, walks around, and you are surrounded from behind."

With a near endless supply of cannon fodder and deep, deep reserves of artillery, tanks and ammunition, Russia is well set up for a static war.

[Jimbo07]

Well, this fighter thing is hotting up.

Quote:

Slovakia's government has approved a plan to give Ukraine its fleet of 13 Soviet-era MiG-29 fighter jets, becoming the second NATO member country...

...Slovakia will receive 200 million euros ($290.6 million Cdn) from the European Union as compensation and unspecified arms from the United States worth 700 million euros ($1.02 billion Cdn) in exchange for giving its MiG-29 fleet to Ukraine - CBC

So, Poland, Slovakia and potentially other allies indirectly. Now we just have to see if some actually arrive, or if this is all fluff.

Interestingly, the article goes on to say that the Slovak government faces an election in September, and the opposition opposes arms transfers!

[The Great Zaganza]

Germany could hand Ukraine some of the nukes the US definitely didn't give it during the Cold War.

[Dr.Sid]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Germany could hand Ukraine some of the nukes the US definitely didn't give it during the Cold War.

Germany, of all places ? Where did you get that from ?

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Germany could hand Ukraine some of the nukes the US definitely didn't give it during the Cold War.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_sharing

Germany has no doctrine, no units, no procedures, no training to use nuclear warheads.

Germany has no nukes, period.

The US keep stored in deep bunkers in Germany and four other European countries an arsenal of 20 each of B61-3/4 warheads, part of the so called "Nuclear Sharing". They are under US control.

These can be airdropped by some fighter planes in the German arsenal, such as Tornados, and those Tornados are scheduled for retirement next year.

Ukraine would not immediately have any launch system for these B61, Germany would not give them any; even if they gave them the old Tornados, that would be yet another system for Ukrainians to train on; and Ukraine would not have the capability to reliably vector such Tornados deep enough into Russian airspace to reach valuable targets. Surely, Ukraine would not nuke occupied Ukrainian territory.

[Jimbo07]

Originally Posted by Oystein

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_sharing



These can be airdropped by some fighter planes in the German arsenal, such as Tornados, and those Tornados are scheduled for retirement next year.

F-35 is meant to take up the nuclear sharing mission. It's no secret that Germany participates in nuclear sharing, so they have no reason to keep secret, "some of the nukes the US definitely didn't give it during the Cold War."

[sackett]

Originally Posted by Doubt

Those drones...are not built to maneuver like a fighter.

Of course not. But maneuvers that place the Predator closer to collision with an oncoming fighter will oblige the jet jockey to alter his approach. He'll have to reckon with an opponent whom he can't kill. Thing like that gets on a guy's nerves.

The man in the loop is often only monitoring the mission rather than piloting, but when he grabs the stick and starts flying aggressively (from somewhere in Poland or Germany or Pasadena) anything can happen.

If the mission payload included a brace of Sidewinders, you might hear Lt. Shmushka exclaim, "Oh fir branches!" before his signal was lost.

[JoeMorgue]

The International Criminal Court has issued a (assumingly completely symbolic*) arrest warrant for Putin and another high ranking Russian official, for their role in the mass kidnapping of Ukrainian children, which the ICC classifies as a war crime.

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news...-23/index.html

*Of note neither Russia nor the Ukraine is a full member of the ICC, which I assume makes their actual jurisdiction over any of this symbolic at best.

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Jimbo07

F-35 is meant to take up the nuclear sharing mission. It's no secret that Germany participates in nuclear sharing, so they have no reason to keep secret, "some of the nukes the US definitely didn't give it during the Cold War."

That gives Germany the means to deliver some of the US nukes kept in Germany, but it doesn't as originally suggested (I assume jokingly) give Germany ownership of any of those nukes to be able to donate them to Ukraine.

[Jimbo07]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

The International Criminal Court has issued a (assumingly completely symbolic*) arrest warrant for Putin and another high ranking Russian official, for their role in the mass kidnapping of Ukrainian children, which the ICC classifies as a war crime.

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news...-23/index.html

*Of note neither Russia nor the Ukraine is a full member of the ICC, which I assume makes their actual jurisdiction over any of this symbolic at best.

It's a real warrant. I think it will be mostly symbolic, though, in effect. It's not that Russia doesn't participate, it's that they won't extradite him. He can't travel to a country that might actually serve the warrant, mind you, but that probably doesn't matter much to him.

[Jimbo07]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

That gives Germany the means to deliver some of the US nukes kept in Germany, but it doesn't as originally suggested (I assume jokingly) give Germany ownership of any of those nukes to be able to donate them to Ukraine.

I assume jokingly, but maybe it was a sarcastic hot take made in haste without accounting for the reality.

[SpitfireIX]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Germany could hand Ukraine some of the nukes the US definitely didn't give it during the Cold War.

MLF Lullaby

Sleep, baby, sleep, in peace may you slumber
No danger lurks, your sleep to encumber
We've got the missiles, peace to determine
And one of the fingers on the button will be German

Why shouldn't they have nuclear warheads?
England says no, but they all are soreheads
I say a bygone should be a bygone
Let's make peace the way we did in Stanleyville and Saigon

Once all the Germans were warlike and mean
But that couldn't happen again
We taught them a lesson in 1918
And they've hardly bothered us since then

So sleep well, my darling, the sandman can linger
We know our buddies won't give us the finger
Heil--hail--the Wehrmacht, I mean the Bundeswehr
Hail to our loyal ally!
M-L-F
Will scare Brezhnev
I hope he is half as scared as I

--Tom Lehrer

[dudalb]

Putin indicted for war crimes by the ICC.
Pretty symbolic, I know, but symbolism can be important.
Maria Lvova-Belova also indicted; she is the one who orignaized the kidnapping of Ukraining Children. Lebensbotn 2.0 and as I think Belova is the BItch of Buchenwald 2022 style.

[Ryokan]

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europ...urope-64955537

Speaking of WW1 check out the MG in one of the photos in the above article. Also, read the article.

Whatever happens, we have got, the Maxim, and they have not.

[steenkh]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Putin indicted for war crimes by the ICC.

Actually no war crimes, but the crime of abducting children.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by steenkh

Actually no war crimes, but the crime of abducting children.

Actually, yes War Crimes, as the ICC makes explicit by referencing items (2)(a)(vii) and (2)(b)(viii) of article 8 of the Rome Statute - the article that enumerates what constitutes War Crimes:

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Rome_..._8:_War_crimes

Originally Posted by Rome Statue

Article 8: War crimes
...
2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means:

(a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:
...

(vii) Unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement;
...

(b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:

...
(viii) The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory;
...

Additionally, the acts may constitute a case of (attempted) genocide, if carried out with the intent to contribute to the destruction of the Ukrainian ethnicity. As always, intent is more difficult to prove and thus, the accusation of genocide might, by itself, be to weak to justify a warrant against a head of state.

The thing here is that heads of state generally enjoy some level of protection from prosecution.
More importantly, Russia is not a party to (does not accept the jurisdiction) of the ICC, and so Russians cannot be tried before the ICC for most international crimes. But there exceptions: War Crimes,Crimes against Huanity, and Genocide. This is a complete enumeration of the kinds of crimes that the ICC can prosecute even if the accused is citizen of a non-ICC country.

ETA:
For example, the act of starting a war, while an international crime, is not a War Crime, so the ICC could not prosecute Putin for this obvious one.

[steenkh]

OK, thanks for the clarification.

[Gulliver Foyle]

Originally Posted by Silly Green Monkey

I read that the War of 1812 was also fought on all continents.

The war of 1812 was a side war in the wider Napoleonic conflict, as it grew out of Royal Navy conscription pracitces picking up US sailors unwillingly.

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Oystein

... the acts may constitute a case of (attempted) genocide, if carried out with the intent to contribute to the destruction of the Ukrainian ethnicity. As always, intent is more difficult to prove and thus, the accusation of genocide might, by itself, be to weak to justify a warrant against a head of state...

The head of state might gift you the evidence of that intent in his rambling speeches of self-justification. It might be rewarding for the lawyers to pick over those with more of an eye to noting exactly what he said he intended to achieve.

[carlosy]

Putin visited crimea. Some short videos of him on youtube, with speculation that it was just a double.

Here is a higher res photo from that trip. Face seems to be fine, but take a look at his hands...

https://bilder3.n-tv.de/img/incoming...5b996eb1b9.jpg

[TragicMonkey]

Originally Posted by carlosy

Putin visited crimea. Some short videos of him on youtube, with speculation that it was just a double.

Here is a higher res photo from that trip. Face seems to be fine, but take a look at his hands...

If he's trying to hide the belly he needs to unzip that jacket more. It's paradoxical, but it's easier to conceal fat by not covering it up so much. If the jacket were completely unzipped the vertical lines would draw attention away from the horizontal swell. He's also forgotten to suck it in because he's distracted by looking up. Unless he is sucking in and it's actually even bigger. The color choices are not entirely wise either.

[Trebuchet]

Nice couple of thugs in the background.

[sackett]

Originally Posted by Ryokan

Whatever happens, we have got, the Maxim, and they have not.

Water cooled MGs are deadly weapons out to 2,000 meters.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

If he's trying to hide the belly he needs to unzip that jacket more.

I don't really think he is. He's not particularly fat by old guy standards, and Russian men are not a very photogenic group to begin with, so I doubt he's self-conscious about his gut. He actually looks reasonably good compared to the local competition. What he needs to worry about concealing are any hand tremors, which may be behind that weird fist with the thumb inside.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I don't really think he is. He's not particularly fat by old guy standards, and Russian men are not a very photogenic group to begin with, so I doubt he's self-conscious about his gut. He actually looks reasonably good compared to the local competition. What he needs to worry about concealing are any hand tremors, which may be behind that weird fist with the thumb inside.

There was another dictator 75 of so years ago who worked to conceal a hand tremor, and shortly thereafter was dead. History repeats? We can hope.

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

There's a crap ton of nuance in here but in the broad strokes I'm done with Russia being the only side that gets to "raise the stakes" and get away with it.

Russia's main force multiplier right now is every other country allowing them to decide how big of a deal this conflict is.

Russia a child seeing exactly how many times they can poke someone before getting punched back so they can play the victim and while we can't blunder into that kind of trap we also just can't let them hold that over us to the point that they win by inch after inch.

I think the Western World can find SOME balance between escalating the conflict and letting Russia do whatever it wants.

The United States is less a country than it is 50 wartribes in trenchcoat with a defense budget capable of fighting God. And that's just the US. The Western World has enough tools in the toolchest to get around the "Everything is a nail" problem.

Since Day One this entire conflict has had to operate under the rules that we have to scared of Russia. We don't.

This is the classic problem of the reasonable being limited by their 'reasonability'. Which, is really just refusal to actually incorporate the real costs of the 'reasonable' actions into the cost-benefit analysis.

The unreasonable side weaponizes the reasonability of the other sides. They will never be held to account the same way, and is usually unilateral disarmament. You can see it reflected in the 'paradox of tolerance', the 'free speech debate' (which is nothing of the sort) and definitely in international politics. It isn't wrong to hold one's own side to a higher standard. It also isn't wrong to focus on the things in your control. But it is wrong to then conclude things like it's the fault of the better side for not managing the actions of the worse side completely. The 'poor put upon' Russians have no agency you see, so it would be unfair to push for things they might use as an excuse to escalate things.

The focus has to be on the choice of the rest of the world to hold Russia both back and accountable; Russia's choices to respond badly are never to be given proper weight.

[a_unique_person]

One families experience of the war at Bahkmut

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...droidApp_Other

Truly terrifying.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by sackett

With a man in the loop, you could have the Predator taking not Evasive action but PROvasive action, that is, turning to ram. Pilot Officer Orcofskovitch would have a sudden problem to solve.

Bad idea. Given the poor Russian airmanship displayed, that could easily down their jet and kill the pilot. And we don't want to do that. If we did, what would we achieve? We would have taken out one Russian jet and one lousy pilot, but we would have given Putin a major propaganda victory.

It's not in NATO's interest to escalate this. Think about it: NATO is winning the conflict under the current rules. Why change them? Why take that risk when it's not necessary? Russia is taking risks like this because they're desperate. We aren't.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

There's a crap ton of nuance in here but in the broad strokes I'm done with Russia being the only side that gets to "raise the stakes" and get away with it.

I think you're looking at this the wrong way. Russia is trying to raise the stakes, but we don't have to let them. Why are they trying to raise the stakes? Because they're losing, they're desperate, and they need to take big risks.

We are winning. We aren't desperate. We don't need to take big risks. So let's not.

[Mike!]

It's not just the hard right that's a problem for Ukraine support...

Originally Posted by Daily Beast

Ben & Jerry’s Founder Is ‘Top Donor’ of Group Campaigning Against U.S. Military Support for Ukraine

https://www.thedailybeast.com/ben-an...ewsletter%20AM