South Korea will provide $2.9 billion in military aid to Ukraine, among other items are MANPADS of the Chiron type.

Delivery goes first to the Czech Republic and will be redistributed to Ukraine.


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....69e24f87eb.png

https://meduza.io/en/feature/2022/09...g-to-die-there

'Honestly, they're all going to die'

What Russian soldiers who have already fought in Ukraine think about Putin's mobilization effort

S
 

It may just be a ploy, send untrained Mobilitz to Belarus forcing a retention of Ukrainian troops for the “in case of invasion.”

Ukraine has/ will have/ ought to have a deployable reserve held fairly centrally. Knowing what we now know, one would expect any foolish invasion to get very short shrift. And what would Belarus call it? War? In which case that country is entirely due missile and aviation to cross its border sharpish. Which would make their crass leadership even more unpopular with the plebs.

Or a modest westerly at 10,000ft after Putin's next stupidity.

BREAKING: Mysterious drone activity observed at the danish oil and gas field Halfdan B in the North Sea.

Danish police and government informed - Ekstrabladet

Ukrainian media reports on the appearance of Iranian kamikaze drones on the territory of Belarus, which makes possible new attacks on northern regions of Ukraine including Kyiv

Not a brilliant plan



Not certain that the NS1/NS2 itself does not have potential to trigger NATO Article 5. A national asset that is within the EEZ of a country or owned by that country would naturally allow a right of self defence against an armed attack, e.g., attack on a ship, a resource etc. If a drone attacked a Danish warship it is self evident that the warship would have a right of self defence and that is sanctioned by the UNC Article 51. It is therefore hard to say that an armed attack on an oil field, or on a pipeline that was owned by say, Germany would not permit a defensive response and therefore, so long as it was defined as an armed attack, it would potentially trigger Article 5. So, whodunnit?

The requirement is for the action to be an "armed attack", and the use of limpet mines, demo charges or an armed drone, would easily be more definitively armed than even 9/11 was, the arm on that day being box cutters... and 300,000 lbs of plane, people and jet fuel.
If NS1/NS2 was a deliberate attack using anything more than chewing gum, it could be argued to be a trigger event. Trashing the Danish oil fiends almost certainly would be as well, irrespective of being offshore.

Russia appears to easily meet the criteria of a terrorist state with their actions in Ukraine, Terrorists using PGMs, white phos, cluster bombs would be given no quarter, yet we have vacillated in calling Russia what it is. Glass houses... Armed Attack on German or Danish infrastructure in the Euro EEZ area is hard to dismiss, "terrorist" or not.

Not good.

---------------

Wanted: Adult supervisor. Immediate vacancy. Experience with sociopaths desirable. Must be good with petulant child. Bring iodine tablets.



Intelligence: Probability of Russia striking Ukraine with tactical nuclear weapons is ‘very high'.


“They will likely target places along the frontlines with lots of personnel and equipment,” Vadym Skibitsky, a deputy head of Ukraine's military intelligence, told The Guardian.

No cars with loudspeakers lurking around the Kremlin? Moscow? St Petersburg Leningrad? What a surprise! Vlad is playing with fire with his client republics who are starting to show signs of irritation with the abusive parenting in Vlad's household. The children can always divorce their parents after a kick or two in the shins.

Those areas are all upwind of Russia and Russian troops, but the radioactive fall out may be manageable, assuming that fuzing of Russian devices actually work. If not, not so good.

Expect to see some activity out of Whiteman and Andersen if intel starts to support a brain fart by Vlad. If I was a Russian conscript in any part of eastern Ukraine I would be emulating a mole and getting some dirt overhead for a conventional show of resolve by the supporters of Ukraines response to Russias criminal aggression.

Russia doesn't have a bright future as a member of the civilised world already, releasing TNW's removes any likelihood of a normal relationship until hell freezes over.
That there would be no response is asinine; a failure to respond gives a veritable green light to NK, PRC, PAK, etc to go and smoke their neighbours.... There is no TNW use without a severe and prompt international response. (nuts; that doesn't mean MAD, it means massive multinational strikes against any Russian military capability in Eastern Ukraine, irrespective of Vlad's illegitimate whining on "annexation").


https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....9265588e2.jpeg

Or he’s ordering Iodine to try to legitimise his claims that he will use nukes.

Look at his eyes :sad:

Three Russian Su-30SM fighter jets have reportedly landed in Belarus

These jets are not jets purchased by Belarus, those are arriving in October, but are regular Russian army jets.

The first such deployment since late March when the Kyiv offensive was still underway

The Problem with TNW's
 

If using a TNW is the answer, then the guys(girls... other) are asking the wrong question.

If the question is how to stop something, TNW's don't do that, they demand a response. That response doesn't have to be MAD immediately, but MAD is certainly closer to an outcome following the deliberate employment of a TNW or NBC.
If the question is to escalate to deescalate, then again it is not the answer, as it absolutely demands a response, and that response has to be such to be a deterrent to the next 2 kopek tyrant that gets their hand on a few rusty old warheads and has malcontent and evil in their heart.
If the question is to defend against an existential threat, then again, it is not the answer, it brings on a response that will lead to that outcome being accelerated.

In the last case, there is no existential threat to Russia, commentary follows:
The use of a TNW doesn't have any obvious (there may be wild ass plays) outcome that doesn't include a massive and substantial response. That response is well within the NATO, US and Western defence capability to be given, to Russia's criminal presence in Ukraine, including the Crimea. They also make the United Nations either utterly irrelevant as it is established, (which led to NATO due to the limitations) or it obliges the UN to invoke the Article 27(3).

An abstaining member of the permanent security council has no veto authority....




Restated:" This means that in any non-procedural matter, a decision is made if two criteria are met. First, nine of the Council’s fifteen members must vote in favor of the resolution. Second, none of the P5 must vote “no”. A P5 member can show its disapproval either by abstaining from a vote or by voting no, effectively making a decision impossible. In other words, a P5 member cannot vote no and still allow the decision to pass. For the P5 a no vote and a veto are one and the same". [P5 refers to the 5 permanent members of the UNSC] In this case, a No by a P5 member defeats any resolution. HOWEVER, where they abstain voluntarily they are showing disapproval, but that does not defeat the motion. Where they "shall abstain" they have no means to give a "No" vote and therefore they cannot veto any resolution. China is the wild card, and is not happy with Vlad, and has problems of their own that being friendly with the 95% of their trading partners that are not Russia may have some weight .

Is Russia a party to a conflict in Ukraine? Only one country has declared an intent to nuke another recently, that is a threat, which the UN Charter also considers as a matter of bad behaviour by a signatory state, so yes, irrespective of the "eloquent and insincere rhetoric" (AKA "BULL$HI!T") describing a criminal war of aggression as a "Special Military Operation.... ".

Is this correct? Recall the UN action in Korea, 1950? Russia was out to lunch and did not vote, they abstained by their actions to boycott the UN. That was defined as a voluntary abstention. Today, they are assuredly a party to the dispute in Ukraine, and have no right to vote on any related matter. How would China vote? Right now, they are not happy with the actions of Russia, and their rice bowl is being messed with. They may surprise. However, China is not a member of NATO, well not yet. They have no say on what NATO perceives to be an armed attack on a NATO state. Nordstream 1 & 2 may actually be considered to be that. The threats made towards the UK, and Baltic states by Vlad recently would suggest that Vlad is getting pretty desperate to expedite the termination of his term in office.

Not responding globally to an aggressive use of a WMD which a TNW is, would be an invitation for all rational nations to get their own stockpiles prepared, and where they are on hand, to use them to settle current grievances, as there is no downside. That is an invitation to the front seat of the demise of civilisation.

NATO is in a unique situation, where they are very close to and may have already been technically drawn into an article 5 condition this week. A simple and prompt change of situation arises from an emergency meeting of NATO (there isn't one already???) and consideration of admitting Ukraine immediately as a NATO member, or affording Article 5 protection to circumvent the threatened actions by Russia. Is that possible? Turkey may actually accept that now, they stand to lose with any further escalation in their backyard, particularly ones that involve nuclear weapons. Expect in all cases that Lloyds and other insurance underwriters are furiously determining how many cancellations of hull cover will be forthcoming; they will not accept anything in the Black Sea being an insurance risk, so shipping will cease going through the Bosphorus, that happens to portend a famine in N Africa and in the Middle East as a foreseeable consequence. More wheels to come off wagons there. Hungary is the anomaly in the heart of NATO at present, their government has a strong leaning towards Putin and his cretins at present, and that brings up the fundamental problem with NATO membership; it requires unanimity, and there is no means to avoid a recalcitrant individual state with the current charter. Hungary has no means to stop other NATO country actions however, so if Nordstream 1 is considered to have been an armed attack (demo charges) against a NATO state (the line was in part owned by Germany... and was a supply to Germany of national needs under a contract... ) then NATO rolling gear into Ukraine to support Ukraine could be seen as a defensive response. Not ideal but not impossible.

Vlad will chose some other option, and we will be surprised, but popping off a TNW will not occur without requiring a severe response, whatever form that incorporates. It is not going to be limited to a sharply worded letter to Lavrov, Mishustin, Medvedev, or Vlad; reading doesn't seem to be in their skill set, given their inability to colour within the lines of all of the treaties that Russia scribbles over like a blind drunk that fell into a vat of Smirnoff's antifreeze mixture.

Gonna be an interesting few days ahead.

Military Aviation: There is not much doubt that there is sufficient TLAM, and B-52's B-2's and F-35s to get a message to every Russian helmet and piece of gear that is currently illegally parked in Eastern Ukraine and the Ukrainian territory of Crimea. Apparently the sortie rate and accuracy that was shown in the sand pit in 1991 and 2003 didn't get any airtime in the USSR/CIS. Target intel is rather better than that today, and the IQ of the smart weapons has taken lots of remediation.

I still think the Kerch bridge is the answer, with Russia having lost the rail system and the ability to resource their forces in the Lyman and Kharkiv regions, cutting Crimea and its supply routes off from Ukraine it would put a stranglehold on Russias forces.

Aviation

Burning UAF SU-24 crashs. Burning and pilots ejected and still at least 2 russian missiles miss

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....fb9d9fc46d.jpg

The rail line at least needs a stern interdicting, for being naughty; even if the road is avoided for now. Don't mind if the Russians can't take their garbage out, but not being able to bring munitions in would be a good thing.

Real in the bunker tone to his latest broadcast. If that’s reflective of the general mood….

The mood of Russia's top propagandist, Vladimir Solovyov in this clip can be summed up as "Hello darkness, my old friend." He demands some victories and complains that people are running away from Russia. He also sighs. A lot.