Aggression by Russia/uk?
Discussion
MadCaptainJack said:
Looks like it went closer than the 12 nautical miles distance that Russia claims as its territorial waters.
Excellent commentary on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ij_ford/status/140766624694287...
Falsified AIS path - https://news.usni.org/2021/06/21/positions-of-two-...Excellent commentary on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ij_ford/status/140766624694287...
Evanivitch said:
bonerp said:
Willy waving at best. Same as when we chase them off from our skies.
They've not been in our skies in recent memory.Story from 29th March 2021.
They have a habit of not using their Transponders. Thus they are a hazard to air navigation.
FF
Fat Fairy said:
Evanivitch said:
bonerp said:
Willy waving at best. Same as when we chase them off from our skies.
They've not been in our skies in recent memory.Story from 29th March 2021.
They have a habit of not using their Transponders. Thus they are a hazard to air navigation.
FF
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/why-does-the-raf-i...
Pupp said:
Presumably, a Type 45 would be able to radar or laser illuminate a SU-24 in order to release munitions in retaliation, if necessary? Wonder if it did…
This is just the sort of toy that Richard Burgon would like to be in charge of if he ever became defence secretaryhe would have it just offshore from Israel just in case
Secretary of State for Defence Ben Wallace said:
This morning, HMS Defender carried out a routine transit from Odesa towards Georgia across the Black Sea.
As is normal for this route, she entered an internationally recognised traffic separation corridor. She exited that corridor safely at 0945 BST. As is routine, Russian vessels shadowed her passage and she was made aware of training exercises in her wider vicinity.
In other words, despite what the Daily Mailski is claiming, nothing happened. Unless, of course, you believe the story about Russia trying to start a war but no one actually noticed. As is normal for this route, she entered an internationally recognised traffic separation corridor. She exited that corridor safely at 0945 BST. As is routine, Russian vessels shadowed her passage and she was made aware of training exercises in her wider vicinity.
Wills2 said:
Evanivitch said:
bonerp said:
Willy waving at best. Same as when we chase them off from our skies.
They've not been in our skies in recent memory.We could throw our weight behind a deal that recognises that reality, and that would end the conflict elsewhere in Ukraine, but instead have decided that fighting to the last Ukrainian seems preferable.
Octoposse said:
Depends on how far from shore they were. Because Crimea is an integral part of Russia, whether third parties like it or not (and the people who actually live there rather do).
We could throw our weight behind a deal that recognises that reality, and that would end the conflict elsewhere in Ukraine, but instead have decided that fighting to the last Ukrainian seems preferable.
You tend to only have those in favour left if you first arrest anyone that publicly opposes you, and then remove homes from anyone that refuses russian citizenship.We could throw our weight behind a deal that recognises that reality, and that would end the conflict elsewhere in Ukraine, but instead have decided that fighting to the last Ukrainian seems preferable.
Octoposse said:
Wills2 said:
Evanivitch said:
bonerp said:
Willy waving at best. Same as when we chase them off from our skies.
They've not been in our skies in recent memory.We could throw our weight behind a deal that recognises that reality, and that would end the conflict elsewhere in Ukraine, but instead have decided that fighting to the last Ukrainian seems preferable.
Evanivitch said:
Thank you, that was an informative read for a numpty like me. 
Evanivitch said:
Octoposse said:
Depends on how far from shore they were. Because Crimea is an integral part of Russia, whether third parties like it or not (and the people who actually live there rather do).
We could throw our weight behind a deal that recognises that reality, and that would end the conflict elsewhere in Ukraine, but instead have decided that fighting to the last Ukrainian seems preferable.
You tend to only have those in favour left if you first arrest anyone that publicly opposes you, and then remove homes from anyone that refuses russian citizenship.We could throw our weight behind a deal that recognises that reality, and that would end the conflict elsewhere in Ukraine, but instead have decided that fighting to the last Ukrainian seems preferable.
Entirely separately, what’s the plan then? What is the possible sequence of events that ends with Russia giving up Crimea? (Or China Tibet, or the US Texas?). Because there isn’t one, so rather than encouraging a permanent settlement of the dispute, we’d rather a slow burn conflict in Ukraine - the policy objective of making sure Putin doesn’t look good trumps dialling back global tensions and saving lives.
This is rather similar to the time they transited a Russian aircraft carrier through the English channel on it's way to the Med. We kept a close eye on it at the time, but I beleive we stopped somewhat short of letting off any guns or dropping any bombs.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38745364
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38745364
https://youtu.be/99zxToEGoOo
Apropos absolutely nothing, ‘Battle for Sevastopol’ - terrific movie (Russian / Ukrainian joint production (happy days!)), on Amazon Prime.
Trailer’s a bit misleading, as the beauty of the film is the stuff about relationships, especially pre war.
Apropos absolutely nothing, ‘Battle for Sevastopol’ - terrific movie (Russian / Ukrainian joint production (happy days!)), on Amazon Prime.
Trailer’s a bit misleading, as the beauty of the film is the stuff about relationships, especially pre war.
Octoposse said:
The place had been part of Russia for roughly the time that the United States of America has existed. The majority of the people who lived there were Russian, spoke Russian, thought of themselves as Russian, and wanted to be Russian.
How widely do you want to apply that definition "part of Russia"? Because you could apply that to the whole of the Russian Empire if you want, but I imagine most would consider that unreasonable.You'll have to provide some reference for the latter part of your claim because it would appear to conflict with what is widely reported, at the very least within the Western media.
Octoposse said:
Entirely separately, what’s the plan then? What is the possible sequence of events that ends with Russia giving up Crimea? (Or China Tibet, or the US Texas?). Because there isn’t one, so rather than encouraging a permanent settlement of the dispute, we’d rather a slow burn conflict in Ukraine - the policy objective of making sure Putin doesn’t look good trumps dialling back global tensions and saving lives.
Permanent solution to a dispute that validates Russian policy to invade sovereign nations and annex land. How is that an acceptable way forward?It sounds like your solution to saving lives is to give into bully-boy tactics with a passive response. So can I ask, where do you draw lines?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff