ADVERTISEMENT

Ukraine and the point of view that Russia aggression is ito protect against nato eastern expansion

Stating the obvious, but this escalation should concern us all.
I’m not sure it means much. Honestly, it was fairly stupid. They weren’t carrying explosives. They were strictly kinetic. Expensive exercise to make a point with unnecessarily sophisticated and hard (for Russia) to replace when cheaper, conventional weapons are more than capable of achieving that result at that range.
 
The Chinese ship was in Russia several days ago and was over the cables when they were cut.

This is a recurring issue with China/Russia. Posted October 24, 2023…

I’m fascinated that this story has garnered essentially zero interest or coverage when it’s the exact thing people need to be paying attention to.

On October 7th (weird, right?) the Balticonnector LNG pipeline between Finland and Estonia was severely damaged. That pipeline also has a parallel line of telecom cables adjacent to it. Those were damaged as well at roughly the same time. Shortly before that occurred - a few hours - the EE-S1 comms cable between Sweden and Estonia was damaged. 4 of 6 fiber cable pairs were completely destroyed. 2 remain operational.

When the damage to the pipeline occurred - three events happened at basically the exact same time. 1) operators noticed a massive pressure drop in the line. 2) a small seismic event was observed by NORSAR and 3) the russian ship Sevmorput and the Chinese ship newnew polar bear crossed right over the area where the damage occurred. Those two ships stayed together into the waters of northern Norway which have a ton of underwater infrastructure. Norway responded by stepping up military presence and surveillance in what is already a relatively high traffic area.

The newnew polar bear was purchased by Chinese company Hainan Xin Xin Yang and reflagged (hong Kong) in 2023. The sevmorput is one of 4 nuclear powered cargo ships ever built. It was built for Murmansk but is now owned by Rosatom - the state owned nuclear energy corporation in Russia. It’s a massive company (276,000 employees) involved in several different industries. Interesting and pertinent here are that it maintains a nuclear powered fleet of icebreakers active in the baltic and North Sea, and it has helped Iran with significant amounts of nuclear power infrastructure including building the power plant in bushehr on the Persian gulf. It is contracted to build 2 additional units outside of Bushehr but nearby on the gulf coast. Also provides about 20% of the enriched uranium needed by us nuclear power plants, and about 15% of Europe is served by utility companies that rely solely on rosatom for their enriched uranium.
 
  • Like
Reactions: leetp
Yeah your argument fell apart the moment you brought up the Iraq war. If you can’t see how they aren’t comparable then we won’t be able to move forward in discussing further.

The rest is exactly what Russia wants you and its own citizens to believe. That is what is sad.
You’re right, the Iraq war was considerably worse.

I don’t like the Russians. I think they’re an adversary. The difference between you and me is that I don’t live in a fantasy world where you get to ignore the complaints of the other side and then wonder why there’s conflict. The West told them to get over NATO expanding, and they decided to force the issue in Ukraine. Not irrational
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls
I’ll keep asking it until I get an answer. You believe that the people of Crimea and Russian-occupied Ukraine are going to welcome Kyiv again?
What do you think? Do you want to live under Putin's Russia?

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: leetp
You’re right, the Iraq war was considerably worse.

I don’t like the Russians. I think they’re an adversary. The difference between you and me is that I don’t live in a fantasy world where you get to ignore the complaints of the other side and then wonder why there’s conflict. The West told them to get over NATO expanding, and they decided to force the issue in Ukraine. Not irrational
It's kind of irrational to start a fight you can't win. If you are going to play devil's advocate, you can't forget to critique to devil. I totally get what you are doing here, and encourage you to continue making points, because they are valid considerations. We do need to state the obvious thing though. Russia aint shit but nukes. Their population, infrastructure, education are ALL on the decline badly and part of their reasoning here is : If we don't do it now, we will never be able to do it. NATO has been in effect for what? 50 years or more, Russia propaganda and intelligence has rallied now behind a single dictator for well over 2 decades now. This is all Putin, he has established a network of intelligence and military that answer to one strong man.

It's always valid to consider the agression of NATO but the chess board was laid out a long long time ago. Russia is making moves on that board, and to act like this is the same as America invading Iraq is not a great comparison. This is coming from someone who protested the war in Iraq day 1, it was always bullshit.
 
It's kind of irrational to start a fight you can't win. If you are going to play devil's advocate, you can't forget to critique to devil. I totally get what you are doing here, and encourage you to continue making points, because they are valid considerations. We do need to state the obvious thing though. Russia aint shit but nukes. Their population, infrastructure, education are ALL on the decline badly and part of their reasoning here is : If we don't do it now, we will never be able to do it. NATO has been in effect for what? 50 years or more, Russia propaganda and intelligence has rallied now behind a single dictator for well over 2 decades now. This is all Putin, he has established a network of intelligence and military that answer to one strong man.

It's always valid to consider the agression of NATO but the chess board was laid out a long long time ago. Russia is making moves on that board, and to act like this is the same as America invading Iraq is not a great comparison. This is coming from someone who protested the war in Iraq day 1, it was always bullshit.
THIS
 
It's kind of irrational to start a fight you can't win. If you are going to play devil's advocate, you can't forget to critique to devil. I totally get what you are doing here, and encourage you to continue making points, because they are valid considerations. We do need to state the obvious thing though. Russia aint shit but nukes. Their population, infrastructure, education are ALL on the decline badly and part of their reasoning here is : If we don't do it now, we will never be able to do it. NATO has been in effect for what? 50 years or more, Russia propaganda and intelligence has rallied now behind a single dictator for well over 2 decades now. This is all Putin, he has established a network of intelligence and military that answer to one strong man.

It's always valid to consider the agression of NATO but the chess board was laid out a long long time ago. Russia is making moves on that board, and to act like this is the same as America invading Iraq is not a great comparison. This is coming from someone who protested the war in Iraq day 1, it was always bullshit.

And your first paragraph is why this has been a terrible move for Putin and huge of us to have allowed to be shown for all the world. Russia is not a superpower. Take away nukes and they are not a country to fear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dadar and leetp
I’m not sure it means much. Honestly, it was fairly stupid. They weren’t carrying explosives. They were strictly kinetic. Expensive exercise to make a point with unnecessarily sophisticated and hard (for Russia) to replace when cheaper, conventional weapons are more than capable of achieving that result at that range.
Hypersonics typically don't carry explosives. Their kinetic energy alone provides sufficient yield....at least as I understand it.

Still, maybe you're right. My first thought was this is a rather expensive point to make and also one that reveals considerable operational details about your employment of such weapons, especially if we were able to track the weapon and obtain kinematic data along its flight path.
 
Last edited:
I’ll keep asking it until I get an answer. You believe that the people of Crimea and Russian-occupied Ukraine are going to welcome Kyiv again?
It's beside the point, and I really don't care. It was sovereign territory. If a case was to be made for succession, that would have to be made outside any sort of military occupation.
 
You’re right, the Iraq war was considerably worse.

I don’t like the Russians. I think they’re an adversary. The difference between you and me is that I don’t live in a fantasy world where you get to ignore the complaints of the other side and then wonder why there’s conflict. The West told them to get over NATO expanding, and they decided to force the issue in Ukraine. Not irrational
Fair, point on the surface, but not fair to view those moves in isolation....as if Russia has not been acting aggressively towards its neighbors and elsewhere on the world stage. Putin has long spoke of uniting the former USSR and has been doing more than just saber rattling over it since he came to power.

NATO and the rest of Europe is not out there trying to annex Russian territory. Russia is.
 
Last edited:
Hypersonics typically don't carry explosives. Their kinetic energy shine provides sufficient yield....at least as I understand it.

Still, maybe you're right. My first thought was this is a rather expensive point to make and also one that reveals considerable operational details about your employment of such weapons, especially if we were able to track the weapon and obtain kinematic data on its flight path.
Hypersonics can be kinetic only. Most carry explosives. Outside of some of the really advanced, new HGWs, Most of what exists today is basically a ballistic missile with a scramjet engine integrated somehow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: leetp
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT