Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments

[PakFactor]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1526609415842979842

Human intellect has gone down several notches as some American's and non-American's on this thread kind of show it as well.

 

[Hassan Al-Somal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1526700203566301184

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

I was wondering what was the motive behind the US Secretary of Defense proposing a ceasefire to the Russian Defense Minister. It seems they noticed that a propaganda can't win a war, and the supposed "unity" in the EU is unrevealing. To simply put it, Russia is not a country that you can easily isolate or defeat militarily.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1526717083483922432

https://twitter.com/x/status/1526439951801495553

Try my method instead.

Begin by asking this simple question.

Why does a winning side desperately seek an immediate ceasefire?

Didn't Ukraine and their fanboys scream aloud that they are winning this war?

Seriously I don't know but based on territories captured and controlled by the Russian backed DNR and LNR militia, I think I may have an idea.

There are so many fake news and CG, repetitive edited video around, it is confusing a lot of people. I gets confused at time but I am quick with my observations.

Russian sides are not helpful at all as they do not revealed much info until many days later.
And so we relied on some of the stories in their social media. Many of them turned out untrue and exaggerate but most were corroborated by the official sources later. So IMO overall the Russia side is still more reliable.

Try China News Media e.g. CGTN, they are pretty professional and accurate with both side of the stories told as they are.
No editing nor unwanted biased opinions by the Anchors.

 

[jhungary]

Don't worry Chinese will buy anything available

This is not about Chinese buying anything. Set aside the question whether China will buy anything is a question (The economic prospect in Russia is bad, most credit rating company would not give junk rating to a country, but 3 out of 4 did, literally meaning leaning money to Russia is like burning Money in a burn pit)

The problem is can you convert the asset into making money, the currency policy in Russia is severely restricted, which mean there are chance that Chinese business invested in Business in Russia may not be able to get their money out of Russia, and Chinese Business is not going to spend Rouble in Russia, they want to spend RMB in China. Which would be a direct problem with Chinese company.

Another issue is Chinese company also don't have a good prospect themselves in China, the latest Chinese Q1 2022 GDP growth figure is 4.8, that's almost half the normal post boom 7% growth with the 2022 expected growth slowed to 5.0. it mean the scope of investment is going to be low on itself, let alone foreign investment, let alone to a uncertain Russia,

China’s first-quarter GDP beats expectations to grow 4.8% year-on-year

China's first-quarter GDP grew faster than expected despite the impact of Covid lockdowns in parts of the country in March.

www.cnbc.com

This war is not new, it has been for 82 days, if China are going to pick up Western Business in Russia, we would have heard of it already. The Chinese are not doing great at the moment, in fact, not a single country does. The ability for Chinese to buy anything to help Russia remain to be seen.

 

[jhungary]

Wonder if the U.S. or some other countries can provide Ukraine a more permanent western SAM system? To protect strategic value sites like Lviv, Kiev, Odessa, etc. from cruise missiles. Patriot systems maybe in secure areas, beyond Russian control territory that it won't fall into enemy hands. Also the U.S. and Europeans should get ahold of thousands of supply trucks or vans whether military or civilian versions with off road capability since logistics is very important obviously the Russians learned it the hard way. Ukrainians will also need to be masters of logistics and learn it.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1526585331318984705

https://twitter.com/x/status/1525909891973521409

Training and familisation is a problem.

Patriot is a very complicated system, more or less like how AGEIS system work, it would take an average Ukrainian weeks, if not months of training to be able to use it.

Another issue is export control, US does not want to lose sensitive information on their system, which is most tech supplied are stripped of essential tech, you can't really strip the essential system on a Patriot....

At this time, supplying just enough weapon is the key, you don't want to overblown it. But at the same time, as I said earlier, US and EU should help Ukraine reach/repair its own Military industry, the Ukraine don't lack of Brilliant design, but lack of production base (Even before this war) and funding limited those option, for example that 2S22 prototype was made before Zelenskyy was elected president, and still only 1 known prototype exist, that's because Ukrainian does not have enough money to get it off the ground. If Ukraine uses US and EU/UK aide money to make those weapon, that would get more bang for bucks than the western hand me down.

About logistic, Russia still can't hit anywhere in Ukraine at any time, Logistic is not really an issue here, but I think Ukrainian would need to focus on Civilian-Military effort on Logistic. Maybe they will do it in their 4th round of TDF intake. Giving the first round is trained to Defend, second round is trained as replacement of loss combat power, 3rd round is train on counter offensive, probably 4 th round are trained to supplies and logistic? I don't know.

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1526659274167951371

https://twitter.com/x/status/1526647848288280577

Some would says the US tried to destroyed the world largest telecommunication company Huawei but ironically this war has helped Huawei instead. Its profit has surged to a new record.

Yes. There is a story of how a Russian patriot dump his German Mercedes and bought China Great Wall "Havel" SUV as a replacement.

To his surprise, the Chinese replacement has performed so well, is so good that he vouched never to buy another German Mercedes ever again.

That is how the alternative branding are getting a new lease of life in Russia and many countries.

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

The latest statistics shown that not all is well for the US and allies as the war of attrition is beginning to bite them.

CNA May 18 2022

TOKYO: Japan's economy fell for the first time in two quarters in the first three months of the year as COVID-19 curbs hit the service sector and the Ukraine war and surging commodity prices created new headaches for consumers and businesses.

The decline presents a challenge to Prime Minister Fumio Kishida's drive to achieve growth and wealth distribution under his "new capitalism" agenda, stoking fears of stagflation - a mix of tepid growth and rising inflation.

 

[wahhab0202]

Judging Putin’s calm reaction to Sweden, Finland bid to join the NATO, he appears to accept the fate. He probably is frustrated Russia can’t afford three front wars.

Or may be he is planning something? Or he knew that it is not gonna happen? Not easy know what is in one's mind, especially when those who are equipped with an absolute power in his hand.

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

Russia responds to EU’s offer on Ukraine's grain​

May 18, 2022 RT

Europe’s initiative only serves to benefit itself, Russian State Duma chairman claims

Russia has slammed the EU’s proposal to empty out Ukraine’s grain stores, stating that such a move would only serve its member nations while leaving Ukrainians without any reserves.

The response came after EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell stated on Monday that Ukraine must be assisted in producing and exporting grains and wheat, adding that the EU will help the country empty out its grain stores to free up space for the next crop.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has also asked the US to ease sanctions on the export of potash fertilizer from Russia and Belarus in exchange for getting Russia to allow the shipment of wheat from Ukraine.

However, these proposals only serve to benefit the West, Russian State Duma chairman Vyacheslav Volodin has claimed.

“Residents of Ukraine will find themselves without grain reserves, and, as for the future harvest, firstly, they still have to live to see it, and secondly, they do not have diesel fuel and gasoline for sowing,” Volodin said.

“Only European countries would benefit from such a cynical proposal. The desire to get potash fertilizers from Russia (they do not have their own) is again about themselves.”

The politician went on to note that Russia has always stood for mutually beneficial cooperation and especially for its development, but warned that new sanctions would “not end up doing anything good for Europe,” adding that, aside from energy problems, the world will face food shortages by the end of the year, and that these problems will not be pinned on Russia.

“Brussels supported Washington’s sanctions policy. In return, they received a price increase in the name of Biden,” Volodin concluded.

Last month, Russia’s Defense Ministry claimed that Kiev was regularly sending grain, corn, oil crops, and farm animals to Romania in exchange for foreign weapons and ammunition, despite the country suffering a shortage of food and agricultural products.

“All of this is happening with an acute shortage of food for their own population, as well as the absence of grain crops in most regions of Ukraine for the spring sowing campaign,” said Colonel General Mikhail Mizintsev, the head of Russia’s National Defense Management Center.

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has prompted fears of global grain shortages as wheat prices have soared to multiple-year highs since March. Both Russia and Ukraine are major wheat suppliers, accounting for some 30% of global exports.

Russia attacked the neighboring state in late February, following Ukraine’s failure to implement the terms of the Minsk agreements, first signed in 2014, and Moscow’s eventual recognition of the Donbass republics of Donetsk and Lugansk. The German- and French-brokered Minsk Protocol was designed to give the breakaway regions special status within the Ukrainian state.

The Kremlin has since demanded that Ukraine officially declare itself a neutral country that will never join the US-led NATO military bloc. Kiev insists the Russian offensive was completely unprovoked and has denied claims it was planning to retake the two republics by force.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

As explained, the rationale upon which the Protocol establishes a distinction between incendiary weapons on the one hand, and weapons which have incendiary effects but aren't considered actual incendiary weapons on the other, is the question whether said effect is of an incidental nature or not. Examples cited by the treaty (illuminants, tracers, smoke or signalling systems) aren't employed to damage objects nor to kill or injure people. Also, the treaty defines incendiary weapons as arms whose primary purpose is to destroy material or kill personnel.

View attachment 845001

If white phosphorous is used with the exclusive and precise purpose to destroy objects or to wound and kill humans, rather than to produce smoke, it then fits the criteria constitutive of the treaty's definition of an incendiary weapon, and its incendiary effect is no longer incidental but central. If employed in such a manner, white phosphorous therefore turns into an incendiary weapon.

This is also the common reading of the treaty by legal experts.

No, almost all smoke grenades generate smoke using White Phosporus and they have incendiary effects. Israel however developed smoke grenades without WP after 2014.
Legal Experts do not consider smoke grenades with White Phosphorus to be Incendiary Weapons.
This clearly says that White Phosphorus is not an Incendiary Weapon.

The Jus in Bello of White Phosphorus: Getting the Law Correct

Focusing on the weapon, and not how it is being used, muddies the law and facts surrounding the circumstances in which a war crime may have occurred.

www.lawfareblog.com

An example of an Incendiary Weapon is Napalm.

It is not a question of reading, it is EXPLICITLY stated that they are not Incendiary Weapons, regardless of how they are used.


The treaty on Incendiary Weapons is intended to stop this.

This type of damage is not generated by smoke munitions.

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

All is not well in EU as well. At this rate EU may split up. Will there be an Italexit?

May 17, 2022

The price of imported energy in Italy rose in March by 72.5% on a yearly basis, the National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT) reported on Tuesday. Data showed that the increase in energy prices accelerated by 5.6% compared to February.

Italy, which relies heavily on Russia for its energy needs, has seen its growth outlook deteriorate sharply since the introduction of Western sanctions against Moscow.

The economy contracted by 0.2% in the first quarter from the previous three months. The government expects much lower growth this year amid rising inflation and supply bottlenecks.

Earlier this month, the country unveiled a hefty package of measures aimed at shielding firms and families from surging energy costs. It also includes measures aimed at overcoming Italy’s reliance on Russian gas by mid-2024 and extending the life of four coal fired power plants for up to two years and accelerating the roll-out of renewable power sources.

ISTAT data also showed that Italian exports to Russia decreased by 50.9% compared to March 2021.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Legal Experts do not consider smoke grenades with White Phosphorus to be Incendiary Weapons.

If used to destroy / kill rather than to generate smoke, they do.

White phosphorous is the archetypal dual use munition. It was not specifically designed for one single type of use. Historically, it has been deployed extensively in the anti-personnel role, e.g. WW1. As such, it potentially falls under the category of an incendiary weapon as per the Protocol.

It is not a question of reading, it is EXPLICITLY stated that they are not Incendiary Weapons, regardless of how they are used.

There is no mention no white phosphorous in the Protocol. How they are used is not irrelevant, the treaty does not state otherwise.

Here's an example of an expert legal opinion, it is very clear as to the fact that if white phosphorous is used as a weapon i.e. with the intent of destroying or injuring / killing, then legal implications will be different:

White phosphorus munitions - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[mazeto]

Well well. With time it doesn't look so bad for Russia anymore:
1. Russian economy held up rather well. Conversely, EU economy didn't. The Russians are already used to privations from past sanctions, the EU isn't.
2. Russian military losses seem manageable now. The Ukrainian depends on donated military equipment, the Russian produce themselves.
It is only a matter of time the EU part will shackle the military part( NATO). The cracks are already showing as members are either backing out( Switzerland funds) or diluting the sanctions using legal language to mask it. Because the NATO are mostly " democracy " and sooner or later their public will punish the rulers for the economic turmoil.
This episode must also be very encouraging for the Chinese. Whereas in the beginning the Chinese became totally silent, they are starting to find their mojo again. Because they saw that the NATO, 5 Eyes, EU or whatever will lose an economic war that got stalemated with a lesser power like Russia.
Meanwhile i am wondering why Russia did not cover the skies of Ukraine with armed drones and decimate their artillery , tanks and logistics the way Azerbaijan did to Armenia??? No need to duke it out on the ground..

 

[The SC]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1526725627599958016

https://twitter.com/x/status/1526728212612620290

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

If used to destroy / kill rather than to generate smoke, they do.

White phosphorous is the archetypal dual use munition. It was not specifically designed for one single type of use. Historically, it has been deployed extensively in the anti-personnel role, e.g. WW1. As such, it falls potentially falls under the category of an incendiary weapon as per the Protocol.



There is no mention no white phosphorous in the Protocol. How they are used is not irrelevant, the treaty does not state otherwise.

Here's an example of an expert legal opinion, it is very clear as to the fact that if white phosphorous is used as a weapon i.e. with the intent of destroying or injuring / killing, then the legal implication will be different:

View attachment 845039

White phosphorus munitions - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Noone is poisoned by Smoke Grenades and the Wikipedia link states that it is not an Incendiary Weapon.
Your sources does not support your view,