Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine

[BleedClaretAndBlue]

5 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Good point. I know America lent us some equipment but why weren't there NATO boots all around the Falklands on the ground? 

Is there some technicality or we didn't ask? 

Geography. Falklands isnt in Europe or North America so article 5 cannot be invoked

[trekka]

2 minutes ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

Geography. Falklands isnt in Europe or North America so article 5 cannot be invoked

This. But also article 6. 

Article 5

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .

Article 6 (1)

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 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.

[Mandy Lifeboats]

Although NATO was not involved there were several supportive acts. 

The UK took NATO weapon stocks based throughout Europe.  Several countries backfilled these weapons from their own stocks.  The greatest benefit was an ample stock of the most advanced air-to-air missiles.  

The US also provided their military base on Ascension Island which we had leased to them.  This included their fuel stocks for ships and aviation.  Again these stocks were replenished by various countries.  

We used the US satellite network and other intelligence assets which just happened to be in the area.  

The US decided to give us Harrier Jets if the number available reduced to 20. They thought we started with 40.  We actually started with 28! 

Spain ensured the security of Gibraltar.  This was a massive benefit because Argentina was considering a Special Forces raid. They were deterred by the security and the risk that we would bomb mainland Argentina in reprisal.  

[bickster]

35 minutes ago, Mandy Lifeboats said:

We used the US satellite network and other intelligence assets which just happened to be in the area

Which also provided us with the intelligence well ahead of the invasion that the invasion would happen. We did very little to discourage Argentina despite this. Make of that what you will.

[Mandy Lifeboats]

45 minutes ago, bickster said:

Which also provided us with the intelligence well ahead of the invasion that the invasion would happen. We did very little to discourage Argentina despite this. Make of that what you will.

To be fair,  Argentina's decision to invade was one of the worst decisions ever.  Their navy was no match for ours. Their airforce was no match because they were at the limit of their range. Their army was no match for ours and could easily have been cut off from supplies.  We could bomb mainland Argentina.  We had nukes.  

The only realistic hope of an Argentina victory was the UK not being bothered to do anything.  

 

 

 

[bickster]

5 minutes ago, Mandy Lifeboats said:

The only realistic hope of an Argentina victory was the UK not being bothered to do anything.  

Which was precisely the impression we gave

[bickster]

 

[Mandy Lifeboats]

6 hours ago, bickster said:

Which was precisely the impression we gave

Correct. 

But it’s still one of the worst decisions ever.  Almost as bad as Putin invading Ukraine because he thought the West wouldn’t bother. 

I got the thread back on topic.  

[magnkarl]

7 hours ago, bickster said:

 

Everyone’s finally seen what happens if you just keep on carrying on even if Putin issues threats. I don’t think people realise the importance of what has happened around this grain deal in the last few days.

[Mandy Lifeboats]

7 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Everyone’s finally seen what happens if you just keep on carrying on even if Putin issues threats. I don’t think people realise the importance of what has happened around this grain deal in the last few days.

This isn’t new.  Putin threatened “unprecedented consequences” if Finland joined NATO.  
Other threats of massive retaliation would be made if: NATO expanded, armed Ukraine or provided long range weapons.  
He also threatened Ukraine not to attack mainland Russia.  Ukraine did within days. 

[magnkarl]

54 minutes ago, Mandy Lifeboats said:

This isn’t new.  Putin threatened “unprecedented consequences” if Finland joined NATO.  
Other threats of massive retaliation would be made if: NATO expanded, armed Ukraine or provided long range weapons.  
He also threatened Ukraine not to attack mainland Russia.  Ukraine did within days. 

In reality I also presume Russia has very little capability left in the Black Sea, so sending the few ships they have left out of the safety of Sevastopol harbour to attack grain ships would probably allow Ukraine to kill off the rest with drone boats. The videos pieced together so far have shown that the Makarov was severely hit along with two other ships. This leaves a few subs and some smaller ships..

In this case it's more like Putin begging Ukraine not to finish off his fleet.

[BleedClaretAndBlue]

1 hour ago, Mandy Lifeboats said:

This isn’t new.  Putin threatened “unprecedented consequences” if Finland joined NATO.  
Other threats of massive retaliation would be made if: NATO expanded, armed Ukraine or provided long range weapons.  
He also threatened Ukraine not to attack mainland Russia.  Ukraine did within days. 

Putin Feb 24:

“Whoever tries to hinder us ... should know that Russia's response will be immediate. And it will lead you to such consequences that you have never encountered in your history."

sounded ominous at the time but maybe he was just referring to our utility bills

 

Edited November 3, 2022 by BleedClaretAndBlue

[bickster]

 

[bickster]

The Kherson Regional Assembly building. Russians occupied this 8 months ago. There's no Russian flag, they are gone

[Mandy Lifeboats]

2 hours ago, magnkarl said:

In reality I also presume Russia has very little capability left in the Black Sea, so sending the few ships they have left out of the safety of Sevastopol harbour to attack grain ships would probably allow Ukraine to kill off the rest with drone boats. The videos pieced together so far have shown that the Makarov was severely hit along with two other ships. This leaves a few subs and some smaller ships..

In this case it's more like Putin begging Ukraine not to finish off his fleet.

He has capability but not capability to stop merchant shipping. 
There are 2 options,

1. Send boarding parties of Marines in helicopters or boats into an area within range of Ukraine. 

2. Sink them at range.  

Both options are ridiculous.  One leads to military loses.  The other is an act of war against the country that owns the ships. 
 

Every day the Russian position weakens.  
 

 

[magnkarl]

Another 730 Russians KIA yesterday. If the average for November keeps up at this pace Putin will have lost 23.000 more soldiers come the end of November. Add in MIA and desertations and we're getting close to 100.000. These losses aren't possible to keep up for a country with no basic first aid, no infrastructure to take care of wounded soldiers and no tactics past charging at pre-dug defensive lines.

[bickster]

More news of Kherson abandonments from local reports

 

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

In the last few weeks Russia has tried to use long range weapons against the population with ever decreasing success (80% +) knock out rate now, with some areas with German hardware at 100% protection.  He has also tried throwing bodies at the problem,  this has also failed.  There is not much left to try,  I don't think they have many support vehicles left or with the supply routes they need.  They have lost the skies IMO also,  they have loads of planes but wont dare fly now.  They can't advance over the river so they are just waiting to die sitting there.  There are Ukraine Special forces active also behind Kherson making it eve more difficult as things blow up and they don't know how anyone knows the stuff is there. (SF direct Artillery to hidden Russia assets way into Russian controlled terrotory.

He may try to hold the line but it will just get hammered by precision artillery over time and will be destroyed,  they also ned to feed and supply the line,  all the time.  Even in peace time as an exercise,  I doubt Russia could do this effectivley even then,  under fire,  no chance.  I think they are done or very close to it.  What would they need to hold or advance,  I just don't think they have whatever that is anymore.

[Mandy Lifeboats]

12 hours ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

Putin Feb 24:

“Whoever tries to hinder us ... should know that Russia's response will be immediate. And it will lead you to such consequences that you have never encountered in your history 

 

He was right. 

We came second in the Eurovision Song Contest AND got to hold the contest in 2023.  

Other than that.......

[BleedClaretAndBlue]