Jump to content

Russia

whelk

By whelk,
in The Lounge

 Share

Referendum on Moscow to officially become territory of Wales  

36 members have voted

  1. 1. Referendum on Moscow to officially become territory of Wales

    • Da!
      33
    • Net!
      3

Recommended Posts

Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, cloggy saint said:

Nothing more than (another) tragic accident. People fall out of hospital windows all the time.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62750584

His company reporting it was ‘after a severe illness’ apparently. Sounds like they’re making the Russian line as implausible as possible without outright claiming he’s been assassinated.

I’d think even going as far as that isn’t without risk in Russia at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weston Super Saint

Weston Super Saint

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Jimmy_D said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62750584

His company reporting it was ‘after a severe illness’ apparently. Sounds like they’re making the Russian line as implausible as possible without outright claiming he’s been assassinated.

I’d think even going as far as that isn’t without risk in Russia at the moment.

Presumably the 'illness' was Polonium related....

Won't be long before they run out of Generals and high-profile business executives.

Edited by Weston Super Saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, Jimmy_D said:

So, while the USSR was a member of the UN, Ukraine has requested the records for when Russia started being part of the UN.

Looks like Russia never joined, and there’s no legal mechanism that allowed them to take on the USSR’s membership. Apparently no one else has ever thought to ask.

Of course in an organisation like the UN the exact letter of the law takes a back seat to diplomacy, and Russia aren’t completely without allies in the UN, but given their current status in the eyes of the World, it’s certainly an interesting question to ask.

From Wikipedia,

"On 24 December 1991, the Soviet Permanent Representative to the United Nations Yuli Vorontsov delivered to the Secretary-General of the United Nations a letter from the Russian President Boris Yeltsin. The letter stated that the Soviet Union had ceased to exist, and that Russia would continue the Soviet Union's membership in the United Nations and maintain the full responsibility for all the rights and obligations of the Soviet Union under the United Nations Charter. The letter was circulated among the United Nations membership without any objection, and Russia formally took over the Soviet Union's seat in the United Nations General Assembly, in the Security Council and in other organs of the United Nations. The letter also confirmed the credentials of Soviet representatives to represent Russia, and Soviet representatives to the various United Nations agencies continued serving as Russian representatives without presenting new credentials. Ambassador Vorontsov continued serving as the first Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

From Wikipedia,

"On 24 December 1991, the Soviet Permanent Representative to the United Nations Yuli Vorontsov delivered to the Secretary-General of the United Nations a letter from the Russian President Boris Yeltsin. The letter stated that the Soviet Union had ceased to exist, and that Russia would continue the Soviet Union's membership in the United Nations and maintain the full responsibility for all the rights and obligations of the Soviet Union under the United Nations Charter. The letter was circulated among the United Nations membership without any objection, and Russia formally took over the Soviet Union's seat in the United Nations General Assembly, in the Security Council and in other organs of the United Nations. The letter also confirmed the credentials of Soviet representatives to represent Russia, and Soviet representatives to the various United Nations agencies continued serving as Russian representatives without presenting new credentials. Ambassador Vorontsov continued serving as the first Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations."

Speculation I’ve seen is that at that time, Khazakstan would have in effect been the USSR, as Russia left before Khazakstan did. Russia technically was just a former member with no claim to the USSR’s position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weston Super Saint

Weston Super Saint

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Jimmy_D said:

Speculation I’ve seen is that at that time, Khazakstan would have in effect been the USSR, as Russia left before Khazakstan did. Russia technically was just a former member with no claim to the USSR’s position.

I imagine they have a fairly strong 'custom and practice' argument to be fair....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted

Like I said, diplomacy and politics will be more important than the exact letter of the law.

That said, if Russia never legally had a claim on the USSR’s position, it might open up some interesting conversations on whether they ever had a claim to some of the benefits the USSR had, for example the permanent position on the security council and their veto, if there was the political will for it. After all, what’s to say that Ukraine wouldn’t have had a claim on those benefits?

If nothing else making Russia have to defend their position will have some effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, Jimmy_D said:

Like I said, diplomacy and politics will be more important than the exact letter of the law.

That said, if Russia never legally had a claim on the USSR’s position, it might open up some interesting conversations on whether they ever had a claim to some of the benefits the USSR had, for example the permanent position on the security council and their veto, if there was the political will for it. After all, what’s to say that Ukraine wouldn’t have had a claim on those benefits?

If nothing else making Russia have to defend their position will have some effect.

If Russia has no claim on any of the assets of the USSR then it does not have a claim on Ukraine or the other states it has taken over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, skintsaint said:

Amazing as they only have 16 apparently.

image.thumb.png.642381cace4702ab4e0971067c4bc3c3.png

Shows how much of a psychological effect they’ve had on Russian morale that they’re so desperate to claim they’ve all been destroyed. Or possibly how bad Russian military intelligence has been, if they truly believe they’ve destroyed that many due to the decoys. (Or both)

I’d imagine they’re trying to keep their own troops in the dark about continued HIMARS hits, but that must be pretty difficult when ammo dumps keep going up in a big bright fireball visible for miles every night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weston Super Saint

Weston Super Saint

Posted
Posted (edited)

From the BBC 'Live' page - looks like the West wants to impose sanctions on Russia but keep the oil flowing as long as the price is right!!

Quote

If you're just joining us, here is an overview of what we know about the oil price cap announced by G7 finance ministers earlier today:

  • The ministers said the cap would reduce Russia’s ability to "fund its war of aggression" in Ukraine
  • It is also designed to limit the "impact of Russia's war on global energy prices"
  • It will aim to prevent shipping companies from transporting Russian oil via sea, unless it has been purchased below the price cap
  • EU Commissioner for Economy Paolo Gentiloni said the aim is to implement the cap "in line with the agreed timeline for the introduction of the sixth package of sanctions, meaning 5 December 2022 for crude oil and 5 February 2023 for oil products"
  • US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen hailed the plan, saying it would "significantly reduce Russia’s main source of funding for its illegal war, while maintaining supplies to global energy markets by keeping Russian oil flowing at lower prices”
  • But some have expressed concerns that the price cap will not be successful without the participation of China and India, which are not in the G7
  • Before the announcement, the Kremlin warned that imposing a price cap on Russian oil exports would trigger Russian retaliation

I imagine the Russian 'retalitation' will include more faulty spark plugs, spontaneous combustion of warships and plenty of white bed sheets being waved around.

Edited by Weston Super Saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kyle04

kyle04

Posted
Posted

I wondered when this was going to be aired, the fabled amphibious assault attempt on ZNPP 3 days ago. Verification of this is virtually non existent, and reports do contradict what evidence has been presented. This pro Russian channel gives an account, from around 1 minute in :

RYBAR Ukraine War Map Sept 1st - YouTube

This is purportedly a video of some of the Ukrainian soldiers KIA in the attack :

Eliminated Ukrainian special force..during kherson counter offensive of ukrine.#russiaukrainewar - YouTube

Another video of one of the barges used, allegedly :

AZ 🛰🌏🌍🌎 on Twitter: "‼️ 🇺🇦 🏴‍☠️ Footage of a burning barge appeared online, one of those that carried Ukrainian troops to attack to capture the Zaporozhye NPP and were demilitarised by the Russian army https://t.co/zEouldTjwt" / Twitter

Ukraine apparently landed a small force of 60 or so men in small craft north east of the ZNPP, which were ambushed and largely wiped out with artillery and helicopter attacks, a handful of prisoners taken, about a dozen still there last I heard. Russian intelligence tracked these soldiers movements from Poland, prior to their training in the UK (really?). Two larger barges were also launched from Nikopol containing 320 men in support, but were sunk halfway across the reservoir by artillery some 40 minutes later. The video geolocation of the burning barge is 18km from the initial landing point, and shouldn't be there at all as the 2 barges were "sunk" according to the Russians. The iphone footage of the dead Ukrainians is also suspicious, the weapons are wrong, the banknotes clean and uncreased (why carry money anyway?), and not a trace of blood to be seen, and none of the faces shown.

Another elaborate Russian false flag, or a botched operation by Ukraine?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:
Probably not real, but....no denial

 

1) It is called being diplomatic - leaving the door open for further visits

2) Do you actually believe what the Russians say whilst completely dismissing the Ukrainians ?

3) Is anybody, other than the Russian Defence Ministry suggesting that Ukraine tried to sabotage the visit ? Why on Earth would they do so ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kyle04

kyle04

Posted
Posted

Dannatt made these statements 11 days ago, prior to the Kherson counter offensive. Ukraine are making gains, albeit small, but they've managed to advance more in a week that Russia have managed in a month. Whether they can continue remains to be seen. The Russian forces in the area are virtually cut off, their ammo and food is dwindling and many aren't even being paid what they're owed by uncle Vova and the casualties are mounting up. Dosen't look too hopeful for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Jonnyboy said:

Jimmy knows more about conflict than Dannatt now 😂

I know more about the conflict now than Dannatt did two weeks ago. A lot has happened. I wasn’t laughing at Dannatt, I was laughing at you thinking that what he said then is relevant now.

I imagine Dannatt was overly pessimistic about Ukraine’s ability to attack Russia’s dug in positions and retake their territory. I wouldn’t have agreed with him, based on Ukraine’s successes with attacking Russia’s logistics and the materiel supply tilting more and more in Ukraine’s favour, but with the lines not moving, and with attacking a defended position being a different skillset, perhaps understandable. Ukraine’s army now isn’t anything like it was when Dannatt was in charge though. The UK training that new recruits are getting might be getting the headlines now, but they’ve been training with NATO doctrine and tactics since Crimea was invaded eight years ago.

Kherson is showing that pessimism to be misplaced. Just from what’s been verified, they’ve reversed weeks of Russian gains in a few days and there are indications things are going even better than that. Ukraine have been going about it extremely intelligently, apparently without the primary objective of retaking territory, but with the primary objective of degrading Russia’s forces in the area. As a result Russian forces have been stretched so thin that Ukraine have retaken some areas completely unopposed. Plans for Kherson’s sham referendum have been shelved.

Meanwhile, Kherson isn’t the only place that Ukraine are counterattacking.

Putin is again trying to start ‘negotiations’ to stop Ukraine diplomatically. He doesn’t even see Ukraine as a country, so that gives some idea of how things are going that he wants to try anything just to hold what he has now.

Also, the mighty Russian army needing to turn to North Korea, because sanctions have closed everywhere else from them, for ammunition that isn’t fully compatible with their weapons, and isn’t manufactured to as high a standard(!) as Russian stockpiles would have been… that doesn’t exactly shout ‘things are going well’. Most estimates had Russian stockpiles deep enough that they would be a non-issue in this conflict, so needing to turn to North Korea is an interesting development. It appears that storage may have gone about as well as the rest of Russia’s logistics.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Jonnyboy said:

Jimmy knows more about conflict than Dannatt now 😂

But what did Dannat actually say ? It might be a good idea to start negotiations because Ukraine probably cannot push the Russians out of the occupied territories, and the conflict is in his opinion approaching stalemate However, he adds, if the West did suggest this is may be seen as throwing Ukraine under the bus after supporting it for so long and with so much hardware.

There was nothing to imply he thought that Ukraine might be losing.

Edited by badgerx16
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kyle04

kyle04

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Having seen your post, then this popping up on Reddit, I thought it deserved the update.

Nice one. I haven't visited Reddit for a while, the videos seem to take ages to load. This is almost comical, Russia are so bad at fakery, unless the soldier at he end was one of those genetically modified in the biolabs...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, kyle04 said:

Nice one. I haven't visited Reddit for a while, the videos seem to take ages to load. This is almost comical, Russia are so bad at fakery, unless the soldier at he end was one of those genetically modified in the biolabs...

The problem is that they’re preaching to an audience which is that thick and wanting to believe that they’ll swallow anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted

$675M package from the US announced earlier this morning.

On top of that US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken is making a surprise visit to Kyiv and has announced a further $2B of military aid.

Meanwhile Ukraine’s counterattack in the North-East of Ukraine has made astounding progress to bring the biggest logistics centre Russia has, in Kupiansk, under fire control.

If Ukraine can hold that, between Kherson and Izium, that’s a devastating number of Russian troops cut off from supplies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jimmy_D

Jimmy_D

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, farawaysaint said:

Welp these guys are dead:

https://theins.ru/en/news/254860

I salute their bravery.

Blimey, apparently genuine. Like you say, they’re putting their lives at risk to show that sort of defiance.

It could be an indication that Putin’s grip on power is just beginning to weaken though. Any way you look at it, this invasion is becoming more and more of a disaster, with Putin having his name indelibly stamped on it, and that’s starting to become clear even to the Russian people subject to constant propaganda.

If they’re killed (or die in mysterious accidents) it’ll be yet another drop in the bucket of “this isn’t adding up” for the Russian people now. I suspect that’s part of their calculation in putting this out. Takes incredible bravery.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...