• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Russia invading Ukraine (NEWS/UPDATES)

Status
Not open for further replies.
The drones are on flight radar so the Russians can see them. They will know they're being watched & putting transponder on is an insurance policy against being shot down. I suspect it also shows Russia that if they move they'll be seen.

The open discussion of Wed is I suspect NATO way of showing Russia they have intel leaks. Or it may be a coded way of saying if you're going to go then go in on Wed & we'll be out the way.

I do think Ukraine is going under the bus here.
 

neiluk1985 said:
Currently flying over Ukraine. I’m surprised these things show up on flightradar mind :eek:

You must be logged on to see external links
Click to expand...

They have to. They don’t have a monopoly on the skies they share them with commercial aircraft so can’t just turn off their transponder
 
It seems that, if they don’t invade, then all Russia will have achieved is strengthening of NATO forces on its borders. I’m struggling to see why Putin would want that. Plus the Ukraine forces can expect a lot of support and training in future. They may not be in NATO but they will get all the support NATO can give short of membership. If they do invade they have a long term commitment and increasingly hostile neighbours. Neither prospect seems particularly good.
 
errant said:
that wiki link there, did something similar happen in the baltic a couple of years ago? i seem recall they complained about a foreign submarine in their waters or something?
Click to expand...
Well there were a couple of incidents in the early post Cold War years

You must be logged on to see external links

The submarine Incident off Kola Peninsula was a collision between the US Navy nuclear attack submarine USS Grayling and the Russian Navy nuclear ballistic missile submarine K-407 Novomoskovsk some 150 km (90 mi) north of the Russian naval base of Severomorsk, on 20 March 1993. The incident took place when the American submarine, who was trailing her Russian counterpart, lost track of Novomoskovsk. At the time that Grayling reacquired the other submarine, the short distance of only half-mile made the collision unavoidable. The incident happened just a week before the first summit between American president Bill Clinton and the president of the Russian Federation, Boris Yeltsin.
Click to expand...
 
r@mside said:
....

You keep slipping this into the conversation, I've made no comment about NATO chasing off subs.

Are you trying to suggest that what Russia is doing in Ukraine poses a direct threat to the safety of the people on this country? Or Russian subs in international waters is an indication it wants to invade Ukraine? I don't see the connection, just as I don't see US subs conducting exercises in the Black Sea as an indication it plans to retake the Crimea for Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Just pointing out why current events need to be placed in context with Ukraine rather than some greater geopolitical issue. It is not the usual area for the Russian navy to be conducting drills and hard to separate from what is happening in Ukraine. Simply Putin rattling his nukes and using intimidation. With such high stakes why should he be given the benefit of the doubt. It's also an area where a myriad of undersea cable are located that deal with submarine communications.

Still no comment from you on why the Minsk II agreement is beneficial to Russia rather than Ukraine.
 
War is proper shit. Like really shit. I hope it doesn't come to a shooting match, I think Ukraine will put up a decent fight. However with Russia it comes down to numbers. There will always be more Russians. Even against NATO we have a technological advantage, are better trained but that is mitigated by numbers. You can be the best tank commander in the world until your faced with more tanks than you have shells...
 
Dogbark said:
So accidental then.
Click to expand...
Which one of the two incidents? But aren't they all "accidental" and the one involving the USS Augusta in 1986 never happened according to the USA but not the Russians who claimed they were deliberately rammed.

On 11 February 1992, the American attack submarine USS Baton Rouge collided with the Russian Navy nuclear submarine B-276 Kostroma off Severomorsk. The mission of Baton Rouge was reportedly the recovery or delivery of intelligence-monitoring devices on the seabed. The American press claimed that the submarine was checking wireless traffic between Russian bases, but the Russians and independent sources asserted that the two units were engaged in a 'cat-and-mouse game'.
Click to expand...
You must be logged on to see external links
 
Last edited:
Dogbark said:
...

Not exactly confirmation then.
Click to expand...
Of course not. It's difficult to get independent confirmation when two hostile submarines collide beneath the ocean waves. ;)

Although the Russians lost the submarine and were furious. By sheer coincidence the Americans had a rescue vessel in the area and offered to help the stricken Russian sub but the Russians diplomatically refused.

A few weeks weeks later the USS Augusta returned to its home port for a "routine service" that included:

The Department of Defense reported that Augusta required $2.7 million worth of repairs due to damage in an undersea collision while on a routine training patrol. On 31 October 1986 Augusta entered dry-dock at Electric Boat to have her sonar dome replaced and the repairs were completed on 13 December 1986.
Click to expand...
Never happened according to the Yanks. I'll believe them.
 
Last edited:
Astra said:
It seems that, if they don’t invade, then all Russia will have achieved is strengthening of NATO forces on its borders. I’m struggling to see why Putin would want that. Plus the Ukraine forces can expect a lot of support and training in future. They may not be in NATO but they will get all the support NATO can give short of membership. If they do invade they have a long term commitment and increasingly hostile neighbours. Neither prospect seems particularly good.
Click to expand...
Suppose they will have rattled the cage of both the Ukraine and the West and given prominence to their security concerns, legitimate or otherwise. It's classic posturing. But yes, may result in NATO being galvanised after years of drift.
 
More willy waving that will come to nowt.

Next week it'll be North Korea waving its willy.

Next month it'll be Iran.

Mind you the gun runners and arms dealers will be making a mint.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top