Post AYPnMCW8uWhsTA2hl2 by darthstar@mastodon.online
(DIR) More posts by darthstar@mastodon.online
(DIR) Post #AYOTHIauhGoVcxhQ9I by DeeGLloyd@mastodon.world
2023-08-04T17:11:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
New video from @anderspuck about #Wagner forces in #Belarus & the chances they might attack #Poland & #HybridWar And here I was half expecting a(nother) video from him about #Ukraine hitting the #Russia'n #Navy in the#BlackSea (again). Things are happening so fast #YouTube'rs can hardly keep up! đhttps://youtu.be/yIkufcRFEds
(DIR) Post #AYOTHJIs3pyXpIGWfI by anderspuck@krigskunst.social
2023-08-04T17:15:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@DeeGLloyd Yeah, itâs hard to keep up. This one was delayed by a day due to a microphone issue, and already something else had stolen the headlines. đ
(DIR) Post #AYOyt54uUlXzI6E4AK by DeeGLloyd@mastodon.world
2023-08-04T23:09:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@anderspuckHoly cow it's REALLY moving fast. Looks like a Russian oil tanker SIG just got hit in the #KerchStrait Since we're apparently entering #TankerWar 2.0 in the #BlackSea between #Russia & #Ukraine, do you think now would be a great time to watch your old about #SeaDenial vs #SeaControl ?Sorry to post 2 of your videos on the same day đhttps://youtu.be/Ld-Co_NQRzg
(DIR) Post #AYPWynhPQ5xXZO8GTQ by Loukas@mastodon.nu
2023-08-05T05:31:15Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@anderspuck @DeeGLloyd i was thinking the sound was really good despite the location. As an old radio veteran i think it's important to prioritise sound quality even at the expense of speed (for analysis spots, at least)
(DIR) Post #AYPePeOunXk6EIES4e by anderspuck@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T06:54:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Loukas @DeeGLloyd I agree. Sound quality is much more important than image quality.
(DIR) Post #AYPnMAy4fhrRfD5z16 by darthstar@mastodon.online
2023-08-04T23:11:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@DeeGLloyd @anderspuck I doubt that Ukraine would hit an oil tanker in waters that they consider their own. Enviornmental terrorism is Putin's bag.The military landing craft, though, they did target...and they're not waiting for Russia to come to their shores to attack military craft.
(DIR) Post #AYPnMBlLiVHC829Koy by DeeGLloyd@mastodon.world
2023-08-04T23:57:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Good point, @darthstar . I suppose we'll have to wait & see. Did you see@anderspuck 's video about Russian False flags? This wouldn't seem to fit the mold from what I recall, but I'm not an expert.
(DIR) Post #AYPnMCW8uWhsTA2hl2 by darthstar@mastodon.online
2023-08-05T00:04:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@DeeGLloyd @anderspuck Ukraine has been very selective in their targeting for over 525 days of war. I don't see them changing now. For example, they've attacked storage and transfer facilities. Oil in a tanker doesn't do anyone any good.
(DIR) Post #AYPnMDCKNgS0ZzmOVk by Acies@mastodontti.fi
2023-08-05T01:05:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@darthstar @DeeGLloyd @anderspuck The initial reports I saw said that the tanker was returning from Syria. I assume that tankers generally leave Russia full and return empty. I'm curious what the ecological dangers posed by an empty oil tanker are, compared to any other type of ship - is whatever oil remains in the cargo holds significantly worse than any ship would carry for fuel?
(DIR) Post #AYPnMECMf24fgOnwCu by eva_chaos@mastodon.social
2023-08-05T01:54:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Acies @darthstar @DeeGLloyd @anderspuck The load of the ship is questionable to me, given the current situation of the war. Perhaps an oil and gas person out there can give better insight. As far as the ecological concerns, this whole war is a disaster six ways of Sunday. Everything from spilling diesel in sunk-ass ships to burning fields to decomm mines.
(DIR) Post #AYPnMF9Z6vQge0VDU0 by anderspuck@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T08:34:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@eva_chaos @Acies @darthstar @DeeGLloyd If the tanker was delivering fuel for the war, then it definitely would be a legitimate target. I havenât seen information about the destination and use yet. Only that at some point it played a role in Syria.
(DIR) Post #AYPssM7rDqGhJ3pr96 by sarahbeck@expressional.social
2023-08-05T09:36:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@anderspuck @eva_chaos @Acies @darthstar @DeeGLloyd Would a truck, a ship or whatever delivering only food for soldiers (and not weapons or fuel), specifically not intended for civilians, be a legitimate target?
(DIR) Post #AYPveAoilpms2doUpE by VikingChieftain@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T09:55:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sarahbeck Yes, anything that is directly aiding the war machine of the opposing side is a legitimate target. Even a hydroelectric dam is a legitimate target if its main purpose is to provide electricity to something that aids the war effort.@anderspuck @eva_chaos @Acies @darthstar @DeeGLloyd
(DIR) Post #AYPveBTqIwgG6B3KvA by anderspuck@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T10:07:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@VikingChieftain @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @Acies @darthstar @DeeGLloyd True. It is absolutely legal to target food supplies for the adversaryâs army. Dams are a bit more complicated since they are specifically mentioned as protected objects.
(DIR) Post #AYPwnkvvxaXScBJvDU by VikingChieftain@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T10:20:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@anderspuck @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @Acies @darthstar @DeeGLloyd But there's no protection if the hydroelectric dam is used mainly to provides electricity to the war industry.https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/g-3/page-6.html#250779But yes, there's the ethical dilemma. Does potentially drowning thousands of civilians justify the disruption of the weapons production?
(DIR) Post #AYPy1OIP1TdKPitZjc by anderspuck@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T10:34:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@VikingChieftain @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @Acies @darthstar @DeeGLloyd Yes, that's why it's complicated. It's a niche case, and I donât think there are any such installations in Ukraine. Another way it's complicated is that it is legal to destroy dams that are under your own control, so you can use the water to create obstacles.
(DIR) Post #AYPyn6WWP2WFC6FcPo by VikingChieftain@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T10:42:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@anderspuck @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @Acies @darthstar @DeeGLloyd I wasn't thinking about the Ukrainian dams... I was thinking about Russian dams. đ But you're right, there are probably no hydroelectric dams in Ukraine that are dedicated to support the war effort.If it's okay to blow up dams that are under your control, then the Russians can't be pointed out as war criminals for blowing up the Nova Kakhovka dam. Their decision to do so did cost both civilian and military deaths (their own).
(DIR) Post #AYPzUVBIbNUK7Y1ARM by anderspuck@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T10:50:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@VikingChieftain @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @Acies @darthstar @DeeGLloyd Yes, the Nova Kakhovka dam was interesting from a legal perspective. Our IHL experts at the defense college spent a lot of time discussing it. I think the conclusion was that it was definitely illegal according to some article, but that lawyers could spend a lot of time discussing which one.
(DIR) Post #AYPzz36942kO02AnMO by VikingChieftain@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T10:56:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@anderspuck I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during those discussions between the IHL experts. They study these laws back and forth, so they know how to interpret them correctly. As for me, I'm just an armchair chieftain. đ @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @Acies @darthstar @DeeGLloyd
(DIR) Post #AYQSP4k8MtCZLa4nCK by sarahbeck@expressional.social
2023-08-05T14:34:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@VikingChieftain @anderspuck @eva_chaos @Acies @darthstar @DeeGLloyd I guess that applies for at weapons factory too! But hypothetically, if someone attacked a drone company on US soil, that were making drones used by one's enemy to attack one's army, infrastructure, or civilians, would that be a legitimate target, even if the US is not officielly at war?
(DIR) Post #AYQSP5XPPgcJoP890C by VikingChieftain@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T14:42:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sarahbeck @anderspuck @eva_chaos @Acies @darthstar @DeeGLloyd Since the USA isn't at war with Russia, such an attack on the USA would essentially be a declaration of war without declaring it. The US would no doubt retaliate in one form or another.
(DIR) Post #AYQSP6JGXktkCpWMb2 by sarahbeck@expressional.social
2023-08-05T14:48:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@VikingChieftain @anderspuck @eva_chaos @Acies @darthstar @DeeGLloyd I know it would be a declaration of war. The US would hit back hard, and it would probably be unwise to do it. But I'm interested in the legal aspect. If they provide weapons to an active conflict, how can they not be a legitimate military target.
(DIR) Post #AYQSP6rIVE7VuNRXdo by Acies@mastodontti.fi
2023-08-05T16:11:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@sarahbeck @VikingChieftain @anderspuck @eva_chaos @darthstar @DeeGLloyd It's pretty clearly a legitimate military target. If someone is producing ammo and sending it to people who are shooting it at you, you're allowed to try to stop them.
(DIR) Post #AYQSP7bNjsz2DJ0LTM by anderspuck@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T16:14:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Acies @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @darthstar @DeeGLloyd No itâs not. @VikingChieftain is right here. https://krigskunst.social/@VikingChieftain/110837669751220309
(DIR) Post #AYQStKqj39A1zHaXvU by Acies@mastodontti.fi
2023-08-05T16:20:00Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@anderspuck @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @darthstar @DeeGLloyd @VikingChieftain Their source addresses the legality of providing weapons and arms to Ukraine. Do you have anything that says Russia is not allowed to respond?
(DIR) Post #AYQUgjraw8sHi87GiG by VikingChieftain@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T16:22:57Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Acies Are you saying that they're not a signatory of the UN charter?@anderspuck @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @darthstar @DeeGLloyd
(DIR) Post #AYQUgkYqLLT9sGLo7k by Acies@mastodontti.fi
2023-08-05T16:30:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@VikingChieftain @anderspuck @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @darthstar @DeeGLloyd I'm sure they're a signatory. If the question is if Russia's war is wrong, it clearly is, and the US and everyone else is right to oppose it.But regardless of the legality of the war as a whole, there is a distinction between legitimate targets, like soldiers, and illegitimate targets, like kids. Weapons and ammo seems fairly clearly on the legitimate side. But I'm interested if there's a source that says otherwise.
(DIR) Post #AYQUglB8305tn0GNnc by anderspuck@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T16:40:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Acies @VikingChieftain @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @darthstar @DeeGLloyd Russia can only target the weapons deliveries after they enter Ukraine. It would not be legal to target a factory in Germany or assembly stations in Romania.
(DIR) Post #AYQVWaFTvfgUww0jA0 by Acies@mastodontti.fi
2023-08-05T16:49:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@anderspuck @VikingChieftain @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @darthstar @DeeGLloyd Again, do you have something that supports that? It seems baffling.Imagine we turn this around, and Ukraine, or some friend of Ukraine, sabotages a Shahed factory in Iran. You're saying that would also be an illegitimate target?
(DIR) Post #AYQVc8oSqc49b31WRk by sarahbeck@expressional.social
2023-08-05T16:50:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@anderspuck @Acies @VikingChieftain @eva_chaos @darthstar @DeeGLloyd Because they are not officially at war with each other?
(DIR) Post #AYQbsdWD3IXPBcjYbg by VikingChieftain@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T16:56:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Acies A drone factory in Iran could be considered a target for Ukraine, but an attack on it would also drag Iran into the war.Let's say that Israel attacks a drone factory in Iran, then it has nothing to do with Ukraine. Ukraine is not a defense alliance with Israel.@anderspuck @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @darthstar @DeeGLloyd
(DIR) Post #AYQbseH0FJy5WkcvXk by Acies@mastodontti.fi
2023-08-05T17:04:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@VikingChieftain @anderspuck @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @darthstar @DeeGLloyd So by that logic an American factory could be a target for Russia, but would drag America into the war, right?
(DIR) Post #AYQbsf0jVIY1oa1Rp2 by darthstar@mastodon.online
2023-08-05T17:08:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Acies @VikingChieftain @anderspuck @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @DeeGLloyd Yes, American factories are making Javelin AT missiles and we are sending those to Ukraine - that's military aid. But as we are not actively participating with boots on the ground we are not a party to the conflict. Just like when we supported the Taliban to defeat Russia in Afghanistan thirty years ago.
(DIR) Post #AYQbsfgD15iztDQZTE by Acies@mastodontti.fi
2023-08-05T17:42:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@darthstar @VikingChieftain @anderspuck @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @DeeGLloyd And the USSR sent planes and pilots to fight the US in Korea. I think the reasons the many proxy wars didn't turn into direct wars between the US and Russia was because neither side wanted WW3, not because you're entitled to supply one party in a war without the other side trying to do something about it.
(DIR) Post #AYQbsgFetI55fA0sj2 by anderspuck@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T18:00:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Acies @darthstar @VikingChieftain @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @DeeGLloyd Iâm not an IHL expert, but my colleagues that are say the same as in the article above: That the old definition of neutrality meaning no involvement at all is no longer considered valid. In an illegal war, the world can support the part that was attacked. Ironically some Western countries stuck to the old definition during this war for some time.
(DIR) Post #AYQfORvzxN0UO8epd2 by Acies@mastodontti.fi
2023-08-05T18:40:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@anderspuck @darthstar @VikingChieftain @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @DeeGLloyd That part makes sense to me - that international law allows a country to support another country involved in a war, and that seems especially appropriate when it's helping someone unjustly invaded.It's the expectation that the other country involved isn't allowed to respond militarily that I'm extremely suspicious of. Certainly if I was leading a country supporting another, I wouldn't rely on it for my protection.
(DIR) Post #AYQgDMPYFft21ikzr6 by Acies@mastodontti.fi
2023-08-05T18:42:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@anderspuck @darthstar @VikingChieftain @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @DeeGLloyd I'd add that part of the issue here is that the aggressor state is never going to admit that they are waging an illegal war. They'll concoct some excuse, as Russia did here, and then act as if they have every right to start the war. So whether something is a target or not probably doesn't rely on how ethical the war is.
(DIR) Post #AYQgDN0m1Hf1tAAisC by anderspuck@krigskunst.social
2023-08-05T18:49:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Acies @darthstar @VikingChieftain @sarahbeck @eva_chaos @DeeGLloyd Russia doesnât seem overly concerned about international law, so I think you are right that in practice it is more a question of deterrence.