Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[FLEA]

1 hour ago, BFM this said:

If they do, then that could be a very slippery slope indeed.

Thinking of the legal review about a decade ago that looked upon service members in CONUS driving to work if that work included over the horizon ops in theater.

The droid was in international airspace.  Is it a lawful threat (target) if it is a sniffer platform (RC-135) orbiting over Poland?

I'm admittedly not familiar with the theater anymore--since I separated last year, the current SPINS, etc.....

However..... if it were the US in Russia's shoes, prosecuting a war in a country with coastal lines in the Black Sea..... a water body that encapsulated critical sea lanes necessary to our supply chain, we would have declared a JOA that likely would have incorporated large portions if not all of the Black Sea. There would be NOTAMS and other types of communications circulated to the international community that the geographic confines of the JOA were apart of an armed conflict between us and whatever state we are warring with and warning third party air traffic that flight into the conflict zone would be extremely high risk and safety couldn't be guaranteed. 

I'm trying to imagine this in the context of Korea, where if we kicked that off, we would likely declare most of the Yellow Sea and parts of the East China Sea as part of that JOA. And if we knew, for instance, China was operating assets in that JOA that were offering materiel wartime support to North Korea, how would we address that. Especially if we knew that support included information that directly contributed to the kill-chain cycle of the state we are warring with. TBH I don't know?

From another lens: Geneva only describes two statuses for "people" in a conflict zone. They are either combatants, or non-combatants. And either status can operate either legally, or illegally. It doesn't really outline the case of an RPA though that is not a person and is simply a materiel asset. However, with a manned aircraft, in international waters, from a non state party to the conflict, those members aboard that aircraft would be considered non-combatants. The general thing about Geneva from my understanding is that to maintain lawful status, non-combatants are expected to act as non-combatants which means not performing actions that directly involve themselves in the conflict. Providing intelligence that relates to targeting to one party of the conflict would almost definitely undermine that status and I think the case could be made at that point that you might be a combatant or an illegal non-combatant. With the former you could be lawfully targeted, with the later, you could be held criminally accountable. 

[FLEA]

Just now, FLEA said:

I'm admittedly not familiar with the theater anymore--since I separated last year, the current SPINS, etc.....

However..... if it were the US in Russia's shoes, prosecuting a war in a country with coastal lines in the Black Sea..... a water body that encapsulated critical sea lanes necessary to our supply chain, we would have declared a JOA that likely would have incorporated large portions if not all of the Black Sea. There would be NOTAMS and other types of communications circulated to the international community that the geographic confines of the JOA were apart of an armed conflict between us and whatever state we are warring with and warning third party air traffic that flight into the conflict zone would be extremely high risk and safety couldn't be guaranteed. 

I'm trying to imagine this in the context of Korea, where if we kicked that off, we would likely declare most of the Yellow Sea and parts of the East China Sea as part of that JOA. And if we knew, for instance, China was operating assets in that JOA that were offering materiel wartime support to North Korea, how would we address that. Especially if we knew that support included information that directly contributed to the kill-chain cycle of the state we are warring with. TBH I don't know?

From another lens: Geneva only describes two statuses for "people" in a conflict zone. They are either combatants, or non-combatants. And either status can operate either legally, or illegally. It doesn't really outline the case of an RPA though that is not a person and is simply a materiel asset. However, with a manned aircraft, in international waters, from a non state party to the conflict, those members aboard that aircraft would be considered non-combatants. The general thing about Geneva from my understanding is that to maintain lawful status, non-combatants are expected to act as non-combatants which means not performing actions that directly involve themselves in the conflict. Providing intelligence that relates to targeting to one party of the conflict would almost definitely undermine that status and I think the case could be made at that point that you might be a combatant or an illegal non-combatant. With the former you could be lawfully targeted, with the later, you could be held criminally accountable. 

Also worth noting the legal implications of LOAC are somewhat meaningless... what really matters is the strength of support whatever action has among the International Community. Lawyers will legal-jutsu there way through a maze to make something sound like it makes sense, and if you get enough western countries that want something to sound a certain way they will certainly make it sound that way. 

[jice]

I enjoy this discussion. I also think this is not the place for it. Anonymity of any individual is questionable. Identity of the demographic is pretty certain. There are some quotable quotes here that could be misconstrued (obviously).

[ClearedHot]

Some of the reports coming out of the Bakhmut region are staggering. 

Ukraine claims (and has been loosely validated), that they killed 1090 Russian soldiers in a single day.  For certain we know the Russians have turned to meat grinder human wave tactics of old ("Keep going until you are killed"), and U.S. Intel has suggest upwards of 30,000 Russian KIA or wounded or wounded since the attack on Bakhmut began.   No problem, Putin is trying to recruit another 400,000 contract soldiers.

[nsplayr]

 

[DirkDiggler]

NATO Edges Closer to Expansion as Finland Wins Over Holdouts (msn.com)

  And in other not great news for the Russians, Finland's NATO bid is gaining steam.

[hindsight2020]

Been a while since I've found videos on the maritime side of things, but found this one today. Let's see if another "localized storm and high seas" leads to another sinking...in the harbor lol. No details as to the tonnage and type yet. The guerrilla navy continues to deliver.

👍

Edited March 23, 2023 by hindsight2020

[LiquidSky]

Anyone looking for a new job?

"Ukraine's Air Force said it will now allow foreigners to serve as pilots and engineering specialists, with a spokesperson stressing the fact that Ukraine will likely need international recruits if and when it starts to receive Western combat aircraft."

 

[pawnman]

7 hours ago, LiquidSky said:

Anyone looking for a new job?

"Ukraine's Air Force said it will now allow foreigners to serve as pilots and engineering specialists, with a spokesperson stressing the fact that Ukraine will likely need international recruits if and when it starts to receive Western combat aircraft."

 

I don't think my commander will sign that particular off-duty employment form.

[McJay Pilot]

A little late, but funny!

 

[ClearedHot]

On 3/24/2023 at 1:28 PM, LiquidSky said:

Anyone looking for a new job?

"Ukraine's Air Force said it will now allow foreigners to serve as pilots and engineering specialists, with a spokesperson stressing the fact that Ukraine will likely need international recruits if and when it starts to receive Western combat aircraft."

I am IN!  Where do I sign?

[DirkDiggler]

Best use of my tax dollars I've ever seen!

[pawnman]

2 hours ago, DirkDiggler said:

Best use of my tax dollars I've ever seen!

Just waiting for someone to chime in that Russia is going to overpower Ukraine with a Spring offensive...because the last one went so well for them, before they lost 10,000 pieces of equipment and 100,000 soldiers.

[FourFans]

2 hours ago, pawnman said:

Just waiting for someone to chime in that Russia is going to overpower Ukraine with a Spring offensive...because the last one went so well for them, before they lost 10,000 pieces of equipment and 100,000 soldiers.

Sadly, in terms of Russian history, they call that a warm-up.

[uhhello]

1 minute ago, FourFans said:

Sadly, in terms of Russian history, they call that a warm-up.

Last time they had the support of the allies though....

[FourFans]

3 minutes ago, uhhello said:

Last time they had the support of the allies though....

That's a fair point.  Hell, they're probably still using some of that left over "support" in the way of trucks as it is.

[uhhello]

7 minutes ago, FourFans said:

That's a fair point.  Hell, they're probably still using some of that left over "support" in the way of trucks as it is.

They were pulling T-54's and T-44s out of museums 

Edited April 10, 2023 by uhhello

[Biff_T]

6 hours ago, uhhello said:

They were pulling T-54's and T-44s out of museums 

There's a rumor (which I just started) that they'll be using horses for more than food.  They're pulling all of the good horses out of the slaughter house for use in the reactivated Russian calvary and horse artillery battalion.   Lol

[Clark Griswold]

10 hours ago, pawnman said:

Just waiting for someone to chime in that Russia is going to overpower Ukraine with a Spring offensive...because the last one went so well for them, before they lost 10,000 pieces of equipment and 100,000 soldiers.

I hear what you are saying and don't think we should cut off or cut down on the amount of aid now but.... there might be a point where the Ukrainians are willing to fight further using our money, weapons, support, etc... and it may be that we have done enough, they have done enough and just declaring a ceasefire and entering decades of a tense standoff may be the best for us, the whole team and I would include free and on the path to reform Western Ukraine.

Would this reward Russia?  No, the fact they would still hold some of Ukraine they wrongly seized is just a fact of life which is a four letter word and we have to accept it.  

This time is not now but I could see it in about 6-12 months, keep the aid and support flowing but behind the scenes begin to think about what and where a Western Ukraine would be acceptable.  If this happens, China and other aggressors will see a greatly diminished Russia, a Western coalition that held firm and likely a price paid for some territory that was not worth it.

[filthy_liar]

6 minutes ago, Clark Griswold said:

I hear what you are saying and don't think we should cut off or cut down on the amount of aid now but.... there might be a point where the Ukrainians are willing to fight further using our money, weapons, support, etc... and it may be that we have done enough, they have done enough and just declaring a ceasefire and entering decades of a tense standoff may be the best for us, the whole team and I would include free and on the path to reform Western Ukraine.

Would this reward Russia?  No, the fact they would still hold some of Ukraine they wrongly seized is just a fact of life which is a four letter word and we have to accept it.  

This time is not now but I could see it in about 6-12 months, keep the aid and support flowing but behind the scenes begin to think about what and where a Western Ukraine would be acceptable.  If this happens, China and other aggressors will see a greatly diminished Russia, a Western coalition that held firm and likely a price paid for some territory that was not worth it.

Clark are you saying that there is a chance that we should've not been in this fiasco with Ukraine in the first place?

 

[uhhello]

11 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

I hear what you are saying and don't think we should cut off or cut down on the amount of aid now but.... there might be a point where the Ukrainians are willing to fight further using our money, weapons, support, etc... and it may be that we have done enough, they have done enough and just declaring a ceasefire and entering decades of a tense standoff may be the best for us, the whole team and I would include free and on the path to reform Western Ukraine.

Would this reward Russia?  No, the fact they would still hold some of Ukraine they wrongly seized is just a fact of life which is a four letter word and we have to accept it.  

This time is not now but I could see it in about 6-12 months, keep the aid and support flowing but behind the scenes begin to think about what and where a Western Ukraine would be acceptable.  If this happens, China and other aggressors will see a greatly diminished Russia, a Western coalition that held firm and likely a price paid for some territory that was not worth it.

Yup.  Def going to be the "tricky" part if they get some momentum going.  

[pawnman]

12 hours ago, filthy_liar said:

Clark are you saying that there is a chance that we should've not been in this fiasco with Ukraine in the first place?

 

I don't read that in his response at all. 

[Clark Griswold]

Clark are you saying that there is a chance that we should've not been in this fiasco with Ukraine in the first place?
 

No not at all
I think there is just a point where in the long term it is better for us and the Ukrainians that accepting some of their territory was lost is better than further war and the cost of further fighting.
Not a fan at all of Russia or Putin.
Free Ukraine will need large long term aid, I’m cool with that, it’s just that at some point if it can be had, ceasefire and focus on rebuilding.
I’m also okay with a surprise deployment of 25k US boots on Free Ukraine with no end date to prevent Putin from trying round 2


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HossHarris]

4 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

No not at all
I think there is just a point where in the long term it is better for us and the Ukrainians that accepting some of their territory was lost is better than further war and the cost of further fighting.
Not a fan at all of Russia or Putin.
Free Ukraine will need large long term aid, I’m cool with that, it’s just that at some point if it can be had, ceasefire and focus on rebuilding.
I’m also okay with a surprise deployment of 25k US boots on Free Ukraine with no end date to prevent Putin from trying round 2


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ain’t no party like a free Ukraine party ….

[filthy_liar]

7 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

No not at all
I think there is just a point where in the long term it is better for us and the Ukrainians that accepting some of their territory was lost is better than further war and the cost of further fighting.
Not a fan at all of Russia or Putin.
Free Ukraine will need large long term aid, I’m cool with that, it’s just that at some point if it can be had, ceasefire and focus on rebuilding.
I’m also okay with a surprise deployment of 25k US boots on Free Ukraine with no end date to prevent Putin from trying round 2

Wow.  Didn't expect that from you.  You've been had.  Talk to some Black Sea desk officers and FAOs about Ukraine from about 2000 up until Russia invaded.  Ukraine is one of the most crooked and corrupt nations on earth.  I understand an active duty person flapping the party line, but dude, do you really believe we should put 25K Americans into that cesspool country that exploited America and NATO for everything it could? And do you really think we are putting a dent into the Russian threat?  They have nukes.  Ukraine doesn't matter just like Afghanistan didn't matter in '89.  The Russians still have nukes.  Let them take that corrupt shithole, then they will really be bleeding ruples and blood trying to control it.  You've been had.