• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The War in Ukraine

The west states Russia blew up their own pipe feeding Europe and was considering article 5 against Russia due to this act… if it turns out this was a Ukr op the west knew about, where does that leave things?
Well, a NATO country’s legal beagles are looking into it re: at least one UKR national (more on that previously here and here in case you missed it), so as others have suggested elsewhere here about initial reports of possible Russian interference & shenanigans, maybe we can wait for more information? ;)
 
Last edited:
We will see how this plays out. In general while very pro Ukraine he has been on point more often than not. Only Operator Starsky has consistently had better information (of the pro Ukrainian youtube sites I scan)

Post from Ukraine Matters

Sun Tzu said "When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe too hard" Good advice then likely being followed now although I expect to see the last remaining bridge damaged enough that all heavy equipment will have to be abandoned and heavy HIMARS and FPV operations against any river crossing attempts.

The Sapper in me cringes at the thought of having to try to create a class 60 river crossing of any type under the conditions present in this war.
 
Meh. I’m willing to cut Ukraine a ton of slack for how they choose to degrade Russia’s strategic capabilities and economy. I have limited sympathy for European countries who, in this day and age, have continued to bind themselves to a highly belligerent Russia.

The answer, of course, is usually about money:

Why is Europe still getting gas from Russia?​

Still, Europe never fully banned Russian gas — even though the money Moscow earns from it supports the Kremlin's state budget, helps to prop up the ruble currency and ultimately funds the war machine.

It's a testimony to how dependent Europe was on Russian energy — and, to a lesser extent, still is. About 3% of Europe's gas imports flow through Sudzha, part of the roughly 15% of imports that came from Russia last year.

But Europe remains on edge about its energy supply given that it's an energy importer and just suffered an outburst of inflation triggered by high energy prices. The Sudzha flows loom larger for Austria, Slovakia and Hungary, who would have to arrange new supplies.

The European Union has come up with a plan to end imports of Russian fossil fuels entirely by 2027, but progress has been uneven lately across member states.

Austria increased its Russian gas imports from 80% to 98% over the past two years. While Italy has cut direct imports, it still gets Russian-origin gas through Austria.

 
Meh. I’m willing to cut Ukraine a ton of slack for how they choose to degrade Russia’s strategic capabilities and economy. I have limited sympathy for European countries who, in this day and age, have continued to bind themselves to a highly belligerent Russia.
Have you always supported Trump’s position on this, or is this new?
 
Have you always supported Trump’s position on this, or is this new?
I have always supported Ukraine’s right to defend itself from Russia’s invasion, and to do so unpredictably and asymmetrically. I have long supported Europe weaning off energy dependence from Russia.

The fact that Trump professed to believe a portion of these same things some time back isn’t a gotcha. Obviously there will almost always be occasional points of overlap and alignment between two people’a policy beliefs. Given how effusive his praise of Putin has been, and his stated belief that Ukraine should give up and surrender territory to Russia to achieve an armistice, I absolutely will not give him any credit for having any good faith interest in Ukraine’s sovereignty.
 
Last edited:
Surprising there is no discussion on the new revelations the Ukrainians were the ones who bombed Nordstream. There was talk about going Article 5 on Russia over this that they knew at the time was Ukraine’s doing… no big deal?

You mean “Bojan Pancevski says it was Ukraine?”

In other threads, you’re not a big supporter of the WSJ. ¿Que pasa?
 
I've not been much deeper myself - to go see a wreck for a paltry 10 minutes bottom time or something like that. And, as a recreational diver, I feel no need to ever exceed between 60-80ft most of the time.

Tech divers are the 'religious fanatics' of the diving world, IMHO ;)
I’ve done some mixed air dives and been past what’s generally recommended for non commercial divers.

185ft is as far as I’ve gone - with support.

The article that @daftandbarmy posted is a pretty good piece about the ‘likelihood’ of it being a Ukrainian Op like what is being alleged by the Germans.

I’ve mentioned before it was very doable - but with the right people and equipment.
I don’t see it being viable without a JIM suit to accomplish what was done.

The only folks in the world who had that equipment in that location, with the personnel at that time, were, drum roll please… the Russians.

That said - I fully support its destruction.
So if it was the Ukrainians, good

If it was the Russians, well I hope some of their divers died during it.
 
You mean “Bojan Pancevski says it was Ukraine?”

In other threads, you’re not a big supporter of the WSJ. ¿Que pasa?
I used to hear big supporter of the Journal . It used to produce first rate material. Somewhere along the line . It began producing stories that made me wonder if someone was slipping hallucinations into the editorial floor water cooler .
 
Aaaaand for the very latest on the Nord Stream caper, here's DEU state media's summary ....
... as well as USSR 2.0 state media's latest take (archived link)
1724007957113.png

In other news, remember @DarthPutinKGB's dictum: don't believe it until the Kremlin denies it! (archived link)
1724008053533.png
 
I've not been much deeper myself - to go see a wreck for a paltry 10 minutes bottom time or something like that.
Which the bottom time is a major factor in the German tale. The isn’t an infinite amount of air a diver can carry, and time to decend will cut into that as well with every 32ft of decent the whole troubling aspect of atmospheres increasing and the resultant increase in air usage - as your air at sea level may be good for several hours - but all of a sudden it’s 7-8x less of that.

And, as a recreational diver, I feel no need to ever exceed between 60-80ft most of the time.

Tech divers are the 'religious fanatics' of the diving world, IMHO ;)
Unless there is a pressing need (commercial or military) it’s pretty hard to justify the training, equipment and support needed for those dives.

I’ve never dove the Baltic Sea, but given the location the temperatures aren’t exactly friendly above the 55th degree of Latitude. September wouldn’t have been as bad as it could be, but definitely wouldn’t be balmy.

I need to come back to this later when I have time to entirely dissect it.
 
Back
Top