Ukraine

[GuitarStv]

If you had access to the pipe on dry land, couldn't you just send something through the pipe?

Yep, that's totally doable.  A few years back I interviewed for a company that builds robots specifically designed to crawl through these oil and gas pipes to look for leaks - https://www.pipetelone.com/.  You would just need to buy one (or something like it) and strap a bomb on it's back.

[Dancin'Dog]

Who might benefit from the pipelines' destruction?   Perhaps a petroleum company, an arms provider, a country in competition with the EU, etc.? 


This war is terrible in so many ways, but it likely benefits certain nations and/or industries.  Bombs are relatively inexpensive and wouldn't be too difficult to deploy from a fishing boat on a dark night.  I wouldn't imagine much identifying info can be obtained from an underwater explosion. 

[Michael in ABQ]

Who might benefit from the pipelines' destruction?   Perhaps a petroleum company, an arms provider, a country in competition with the EU, etc.? 


This war is terrible in so many ways, but it likely benefits certain nations and/or industries.  Bombs are relatively inexpensive and wouldn't be too difficult to deploy from a fishing boat on a dark night.  I wouldn't imagine much identifying info can be obtained from an underwater explosion.

Cui bono - who benefits?

US - Ensures Germany can't get cold feet and start importing Russian gas this winter - thus propping up Russia.

Russia - Let's them blame the US/west (this is already the Russian spin) and since Germany wasn't buying the gas anyways it doesn't hurt them in the short term (though long-term if seawater floods into the pipe and it's not fixed it could become unusable).

Ukraine - Similar motivation to the US

There are other possible players, but this was almost certainly carried out by a nation-state. The US and Russia certainly have the capability to remotely deploy a bomb next to a fixed pipeline from a submarine or surface vessel. Some business or non-state actor is possible - but not likely. The kind of stuff happens in movies, but not so much in real life.

[Radagast]

Russian trolls have been out in force blaming the US. So definitely Russia did it. They could have sent a bomb through the pipes, there are all sorts of videoing and cutting and grinding and repair tools I have used on water and sewer pipes, and I'm sure there are welders and others, a bomb could easily be carried in by something similar for that size of steel pipe. But it wasn't, it was dropped or carried from the water side to increase plausible deniability for the masses and to send a message to smarter people that "hey this could have been any type of subsea infrastructure, it was just our defunct gas line this first time, but the next one might be your active gas line, or maybe a vital fiber cable? Be afraid!".

[TomTX]

Pipelines: how would you attack them? Does it require a submarine? An underwater drone usually has an umbilical cable for power and communications.

The depth would make it hard to impossible to use just human divers so yes,

Nah. It's not possible for casual recreational divers to go down 75 meters safely, but there are thousands of technical divers who could do it easily. The equipment is readily available as well. I'm not a technical diver, but was reading their discussions - the consensus estimate was if they kept bottom time to 30 minutes or less there wouldn't even be significant decompression issues.

Another reason for Russia to do it: Gazprom was facing some rather stiff contractual nonperformance penalties for failing to ship gas. Russia's excuses for shutting down NS1 have gotten increasingly thin. Now they can go "Those nasty Westerners made us stop! We don't have to pay penalties!"

[pecunia]

Pipelines: how would you attack them? Does it require a submarine? An underwater drone usually has an umbilical cable for power and communications.

The depth would make it hard to impossible to use just human divers so yes,

Nah. It's not possible for casual recreational divers to go down 75 meters safely, but there are thousands of technical divers who could do it easily. The equipment is readily available as well. I'm not a technical diver, but was reading their discussions - the consensus estimate was if they kept bottom time to 30 minutes or less there wouldn't even be significant decompression issues.

Another reason for Russia to do it: Gazprom was facing some rather stiff contractual nonperformance penalties for failing to ship gas. Russia's excuses for shutting down NS1 have gotten increasingly thin. Now they can go "Those nasty Westerners made us stop! We don't have to pay penalties!"

It seems rather exotic to open a pipe filled with methane and then sending a robot through.  You would need access to some sort of air lock to put the robot into the pipe.  Nobody has mentioned an organization like Greenpeace.  Some of these organizations really want to hasten the move to renewables whether they are fully practical or not.

[lemanfan]

Pipelines: how would you attack them? Does it require a submarine? An underwater drone usually has an umbilical cable for power and communications.

The depth would make it hard to impossible to use just human divers so yes,

Nah. It's not possible for casual recreational divers to go down 75 meters safely, but there are thousands of technical divers who could do it easily. The equipment is readily available as well. I'm not a technical diver, but was reading their discussions - the consensus estimate was if they kept bottom time to 30 minutes or less there wouldn't even be significant decompression issues.

Another reason for Russia to do it: Gazprom was facing some rather stiff contractual nonperformance penalties for failing to ship gas. Russia's excuses for shutting down NS1 have gotten increasingly thin. Now they can go "Those nasty Westerners made us stop! We don't have to pay penalties!"

It seems rather exotic to open a pipe filled with methane and then sending a robot through.  You would need access to some sort of air lock to put the robot into the pipe.  Nobody has mentioned an organization like Greenpeace.  Some of these organizations really want to hasten the move to renewables whether they are fully practical or not.

Are we getting closer and closer to Canada now? Trudeau probably has both the means and the motives - I've heard he dislikes pipelines.  Let's bring back the "Blame Canada" song from South Park.  ;)

Joking aside:

We're now up to four different leaks by according to Swedish media. One leak in each pipeline a bit to the north, and one leak in each pipeline about 7 km south of the first ones. The detonations in the north and south sites were hours apart.  Current estimates guess that the gas flow will be low enough for closer examinations on Sunday. 

And everything I read here is that the experts all points to Russia as the most probable culprit, but without being able to say why. On the other hand, Russia has been the arch enemy of Sweden for 800 years or so, so we like to blame them for everything.

[Captain Cactus]

I was an exchange student for a year in France many years ago and I had a friend there on the same program from Russia to France.  He was a great guy, taught me how to roll and smoke my own cigarettes, drink vodka, etc... Sadly we lost touch when we went back to our own countries.

I think of guys like him when I hear about the conscription and untrained men being forced to go to the front lines.  I wish there was something that could be done, some way of letting these guys know they don't have to fight, that there are ways of killing your officers, surrender and perhaps get on a track to citizenship in another European country...or at least wait things out 'til Putin is dispatched like Romanovs. 

I know this is naïve and not really thought out very well.  But I just think of the human lives and human potential being wasted by this madness.  I pray for peace. 

[zolotiyeruki]

It seems rather exotic to open a pipe filled with methane and then sending a robot through.  You would need access to some sort of air lock to put the robot into the pipe.  Nobody has mentioned an organization like Greenpeace.  Some of these organizations really want to hasten the move to renewables whether they are fully practical or not.

Actually, every pipeline has exactly that sort of "air lock."  It's called a pig launcher (at the end where you put the robot in) and a pig catcher (at the end where you take it out.  The "robot" is called a pig, naturally, supposedly because it makes squealing sounds as it goes through the pipeline.  Pigs are used for all sorts of purposes--some are highly instrumented and inspect the inside of the pipeline as they are pushed along.  Some are used when transitioning from one fluid in a pipeline to another, for example if you're switching from gasoline to diesel, you put a pig in to keep the streams from mixing.

[gaja]

If you consider the internal power struggles among the Russina oligarchs, it would make sense for Putin to blow up the pipe lines. Now there is no immidiate monetary reward in a coup; You can't just open the gas pipe the next day and be flooded with money. And if you look at the number of oligarchs falling out of windows, it is clear that there are a lot of internal power struggles in Russia.

No way this is Greenpeace or other environmentalists. The methane emissions from these few explosions almost equal the total annual emissions from Denmark. We are reaching several tipping points, and methane is extremely strong as a greenhouse gas if you look at it in a short time perspective; 84 times CO2 in a 20 year perspective.
-Or, forget it. We are talking about Greenpeace; the organization which destroyed the traditional, and quite sustainable, Inuit seal skin industry, and helped revitalize Faroese and Norwegian whaling by their completely inept protest campaigns. Sure. They would do something as stupid as this.

Nah. Still think it is the Russians. They are crazy.

[TomTX]

Pipelines: how would you attack them? Does it require a submarine? An underwater drone usually has an umbilical cable for power and communications.

The depth would make it hard to impossible to use just human divers so yes,

Nah. It's not possible for casual recreational divers to go down 75 meters safely, but there are thousands of technical divers who could do it easily. The equipment is readily available as well. I'm not a technical diver, but was reading their discussions - the consensus estimate was if they kept bottom time to 30 minutes or less there wouldn't even be significant decompression issues.

Another reason for Russia to do it: Gazprom was facing some rather stiff contractual nonperformance penalties for failing to ship gas. Russia's excuses for shutting down NS1 have gotten increasingly thin. Now they can go "Those nasty Westerners made us stop! We don't have to pay penalties!"

It seems rather exotic to open a pipe filled with methane and then sending a robot through.  You would need access to some sort of air lock to put the robot into the pipe.  Nobody has mentioned an organization like Greenpeace.  Some of these organizations really want to hasten the move to renewables whether they are fully practical or not.

Robot? Where do you get that?

Technical diver goes down with bomb. Tuck bomb next to pipeline, either set timer or plan on remote detonation. Go back up. Done.

[Michael in ABQ]

https://geopoliticalfutures.com/speculating-on-nord-stream

This is a subscription site, but the gist of the article is that Russia is almost certainly the culprit. This drives up the price of natural gas which benefits Russia - while still leaving the possibility for them to export gas via these pipelines in the future as one is still undamaged.

There are actually 4 pipelines. Nord Stream 1 has two parallel pipelines - both were damaged - and Nord Stream 2 has two parallel pipelines - only one was damaged. These pipelines are about 1.5" thick steel encased in concrete. So, it would require some type of bomb to get through that. Not just a diver with a cutting torch (who would of course get blown up if they cut into a pipeline still filled with natural gas).

Whoever destroyed these either intentionally left one pipeline intact as a possible bargaining chip "sure Germany, we can still provide some natural gas." or there was a problem with the operation to sabotage all 4 and only 3 were done successfully. I'm sure there will be an investigation and finding an unexploded bomb on the 4th line would be pretty incriminating.

[lost_in_the_endless_aisle]

https://geopoliticalfutures.com/speculating-on-nord-stream

This is a subscription site, but the gist of the article is that Russia is almost certainly the culprit. This drives up the price of natural gas which benefits Russia - while still leaving the possibility for them to export gas via these pipelines in the future as one is still undamaged.

There are actually 4 pipelines. Nord Stream 1 has two parallel pipelines - both were damaged - and Nord Stream 2 has two parallel pipelines - only one was damaged. These pipelines are about 1.5" thick steel encased in concrete. So, it would require some type of bomb to get through that. Not just a diver with a cutting torch (who would of course get blown up if they cut into a pipeline still filled with natural gas).

Whoever destroyed these either intentionally left one pipeline intact as a possible bargaining chip "sure Germany, we can still provide some natural gas." or there was a problem with the operation to sabotage all 4 and only 3 were done successfully. I'm sure there will be an investigation and finding an unexploded bomb on the 4th line would be pretty incriminating.

I don't follow that explanation, since Russia already had the ability to turn on and off gas supplies to Europe. Destroying the pipeline gives them fewer options in the future, which limits their strategies.

What gaja said makes far more sense--that this was a move to shift the internal Russian incentives around supporting or defecting away from the current regime.

[slackmax]

Maybe already answered, but are both of the pipelines now shout down on the producing end? 

The news was showing huge billowing eruptions of gas in the Baltic. Was that eruption just existing gas in the pipeline which is taking forever to bubble out, with ocean water rushing into the pipe?

Of course the news didn't answer my question, which everyone has.

One would hope the pipelines have been shut off somewhere before they enter the Baltic, and all that beautiful natural gas is not being wasted.

But then there was Saddam Hussein torching his oil fields for months and months, right?   


Thanks

[TomTX]

https://geopoliticalfutures.com/speculating-on-nord-stream

This is a subscription site, but the gist of the article is that Russia is almost certainly the culprit. This drives up the price of natural gas which benefits Russia - while still leaving the possibility for them to export gas via these pipelines in the future as one is still undamaged.

There are actually 4 pipelines. Nord Stream 1 has two parallel pipelines - both were damaged - and Nord Stream 2 has two parallel pipelines - only one was damaged. These pipelines are about 1.5" thick steel encased in concrete. So, it would require some type of bomb to get through that. Not just a diver with a cutting torch (who would of course get blown up if they cut into a pipeline still filled with natural gas).

Whoever destroyed these either intentionally left one pipeline intact as a possible bargaining chip "sure Germany, we can still provide some natural gas." or there was a problem with the operation to sabotage all 4 and only 3 were done successfully. I'm sure there will be an investigation and finding an unexploded bomb on the 4th line would be pretty incriminating.

I don't follow that explanation, since Russia already had the ability to turn on and off gas supplies to Europe. Destroying the pipeline gives them fewer options in the future, which limits their strategies.

What gaja said makes far more sense--that this was a move to shift the internal Russian incentives around supporting or defecting away from the current regime.

Blown up pipeline also gets them out of "failure to deliver" contract penalty clauses. Russia was already pushing into very thin excuses for not supplying gas per contract.

[zolotiyeruki]

There are actually 4 pipelines. Nord Stream 1 has two parallel pipelines - both were damaged - and Nord Stream 2 has two parallel pipelines - only one was damaged. These pipelines are about 1.5" thick steel encased in concrete. So, it would require some type of bomb to get through that. Not just a diver with a cutting torch (who would of course get blown up if they cut into a pipeline still filled with natural gas).

Without oxygen, the natural gas in a pipeline won't ignite.  The diver's safe.

[MustacheAndaHalf]

Russian soldiers brought referendums to several regions in Ukraine.  The choices were:
(A) join Russia
(B) one of the soldiers should shoot me

Most of the surviving voters picked (A).  Those picking (B) were unavailable for comment.

[Abe]

Maybe already answered, but are both of the pipelines now shout down on the producing end? 

The news was showing huge billowing eruptions of gas in the Baltic. Was that eruption just existing gas in the pipeline which is taking forever to bubble out, with ocean water rushing into the pipe?

Of course the news didn't answer my question, which everyone has.

One would hope the pipelines have been shut off somewhere before they enter the Baltic, and all that beautiful natural gas is not being wasted.

But then there was Saddam Hussein torching his oil fields for months and months, right?   


Thanks

Both were shut off prior to this, the bubbling is the residual within the pipe itself

[LennStar]

And everything I read here is that the experts all points to Russia as the most probable culprit, but without being able to say why.

1) Signal: Nice other pipelines and cables you have here. Would be a pity if something happened to them.
2) Nordstream 2 (the one closed down half a year ago) is still intact. But if Germany wants gas through that...
3) as mentioned, contract penalties.

I wonder why everyone is suprised now. Destroying pipelines is a standard scenario for war times - even I know that and I never was in any army. The sea pipelines are an especially worthwhile target since they are so fucking hard to repair/replace.

------

Putin is now in a position where he can only make "stupid" moves. At the moment he is putting out every thread he can get his hands on in a try to make weak western governments go back with their help through "we will freeze!" public pressure, "he will use atomic bombs" etc.

Thing is, he might. Because it's likely his life depends on it, so outside a total global destruction, he will do whatever is needed for his survival.

I know I do it far too often, but I want to point out the book in my signature.

[Poundwise]

Putin is now in a position where he can only make "stupid" moves. At the moment he is putting out every thread he can get his hands on in a try to make weak western governments go back with their help through "we will freeze!" public pressure, "he will use atomic bombs" etc.

If this is the case, he overestimates the average person.  We can't plan ahead enough to prevent getting hit by credit card fines-- we can't even get it together to wear masks during a pandemic, or fight climate change even when we're flooded every other year, or stop drinking or smoking-- what makes him think that the average voter in a Western country would get off their butts to pressure governments about high gas prices that are going to happen, or worry about atomic bombing that has never happened before in their country?

I guess I could see people beginning to agitate about a month after it gets really cold and gas bills arrive...

[pecunia]

Putin is now in a position where he can only make "stupid" moves. At the moment he is putting out every thread he can get his hands on in a try to make weak western governments go back with their help through "we will freeze!" public pressure, "he will use atomic bombs" etc.

If this is the case, he overestimates the average person.  We can't plan ahead enough to prevent getting hit by credit card fines-- we can't even get it together to wear masks during a pandemic, or fight climate change even when we're flooded every other year, or stop drinking or smoking-- what makes him think that the average voter in a Western country would get off their butts to pressure governments about high gas prices that are going to happen, or worry about atomic bombing that has never happened before in their country?

I guess I could see people beginning to agitate about a month after it gets really cold and gas bills arrive...

Adequate PR needs to be kept up to ensure the people blame Putin.  It's kind of abstract for many of them.  If Putin's actions are not pointed out to them, their blame will fall upon a more local source.  To be honest with you, I do expect price gouging in addition to the "normal" price hikes.

[Michael in ABQ]

There are actually 4 pipelines. Nord Stream 1 has two parallel pipelines - both were damaged - and Nord Stream 2 has two parallel pipelines - only one was damaged. These pipelines are about 1.5" thick steel encased in concrete. So, it would require some type of bomb to get through that. Not just a diver with a cutting torch (who would of course get blown up if they cut into a pipeline still filled with natural gas).

Without oxygen, the natural gas in a pipeline won't ignite.  The diver's safe.

Good point. I'm not sure what the pressure is like inside those pipes but I sure as hell wouldn't want to be using a cutting torch on a pipeline filled with explosive gas - even leaving aside the possible explosion aspect I'm sure having all that gas come out (and seawater try to go back in) would make for a dangerous situation.

[Michael in ABQ]

https://geopoliticalfutures.com/speculating-on-nord-stream

This is a subscription site, but the gist of the article is that Russia is almost certainly the culprit. This drives up the price of natural gas which benefits Russia - while still leaving the possibility for them to export gas via these pipelines in the future as one is still undamaged.

There are actually 4 pipelines. Nord Stream 1 has two parallel pipelines - both were damaged - and Nord Stream 2 has two parallel pipelines - only one was damaged. These pipelines are about 1.5" thick steel encased in concrete. So, it would require some type of bomb to get through that. Not just a diver with a cutting torch (who would of course get blown up if they cut into a pipeline still filled with natural gas).

Whoever destroyed these either intentionally left one pipeline intact as a possible bargaining chip "sure Germany, we can still provide some natural gas." or there was a problem with the operation to sabotage all 4 and only 3 were done successfully. I'm sure there will be an investigation and finding an unexploded bomb on the 4th line would be pretty incriminating.

I don't follow that explanation, since Russia already had the ability to turn on and off gas supplies to Europe. Destroying the pipeline gives them fewer options in the future, which limits their strategies.

What gaja said makes far more sense--that this was a move to shift the internal Russian incentives around supporting or defecting away from the current regime.

Here's a quote from the article I linked to.

"Why would Russia blow up its own pipelines? To demonstrate to Europe that its sanctions aren’t working, and that the Kremlin is serious about shifting its energy exports to Asia and dumping the European market – while, conveniently, leaving one connection open in case Europe changes course."

Leaving the single pipeline untouched may have been unintended though.

Norway just opened up a new underwater natural gas pipeline to Poland this week. Blowing up Nord Stream shows Europe that Russia could just as easily do that to any other pipelines.

[LennStar]

Putin is now in a position where he can only make "stupid" moves. At the moment he is putting out every thread he can get his hands on in a try to make weak western governments go back with their help through "we will freeze!" public pressure, "he will use atomic bombs" etc.

If this is the case, he overestimates the average person.  We can't plan ahead enough to prevent getting hit by credit card fines-- we can't even get it together to wear masks during a pandemic, or fight climate change even when we're flooded every other year, or stop drinking or smoking-- what makes him think that the average voter in a Western country would get off their butts to pressure governments about high gas prices that are going to happen, or worry about atomic bombing that has never happened before in their country?

I guess I could see people beginning to agitate about a month after it gets really cold and gas bills arrive...

I gues you are from the US?
I can assure you people here in Germany are VERY concerned about gas prices. And the older generations grew up with the knowledge that their homes would be the center of any war between East and West, including the atomice one.
Of course media pushing this up is part of the process. (Including predictions from several sides that the gas prices might result in a "revolution" if we get a cold winter.)

There are also theories that there is an agreement that Putin does nothing to other countries as long as NATO does not send battle tanks (so far none have been given to Ukraine, despite Ukraine asking about once per week to give them e.g. the 40 Leopard I standing ready at the producer)
Demands to also send tanks have been increasing a lot since the successful attack, so the pipelines could have been a counterpressure. - Everything completely speculation though.

[pecunia]

Putin is now in a position where he can only make "stupid" moves. At the moment he is putting out every thread he can get his hands on in a try to make weak western governments go back with their help through "we will freeze!" public pressure, "he will use atomic bombs" etc.

If this is the case, he overestimates the average person.  We can't plan ahead enough to prevent getting hit by credit card fines-- we can't even get it together to wear masks during a pandemic, or fight climate change even when we're flooded every other year, or stop drinking or smoking-- what makes him think that the average voter in a Western country would get off their butts to pressure governments about high gas prices that are going to happen, or worry about atomic bombing that has never happened before in their country?

I guess I could see people beginning to agitate about a month after it gets really cold and gas bills arrive...

I gues you are from the US?
I can assure you people here in Germany are VERY concerned about gas prices. And the older generations grew up with the knowledge that their homes would be the center of any war between East and West, including the atomice one.
Of course media pushing this up is part of the process. (Including predictions from several sides that the gas prices might result in a "revolution" if we get a cold winter.)

There are also theories that there is an agreement that Putin does nothing to other countries as long as NATO does not send battle tanks (so far none have been given to Ukraine, despite Ukraine asking about once per week to give them e.g. the 40 Leopard I standing ready at the producer)
Demands to also send tanks have been increasing a lot since the successful attack, so the pipelines could have been a counterpressure. - Everything completely speculation though.

I believe Poland is supplying tanks to Ukraine.  They will be replaced by South Korean tanks.

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2022/04/26/poland-confirms-t-72-tank-delivery-to-ukraine-with-challenger-2-tanks-to-fill-gap/

The US does not supply Abrams tanks due to the sophisticated support network required.  That may change.  There is something to be said for the KISS principle (Keep It Simple Stupid)

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a41298207/western-tanks-could-be-sent-to-ukraine/

Germany has long been known as a manufacturer of excellent armaments.  German tanks supplied to Ukraine could make a real difference.

The sooner this war ends and Ukraine reclaims it's territory then the sooner Ukrainian gas can be sent to Germany.

[PeteD01]

Looks like an important part of the Russian defensive lines and logistics is in the process of collapsing after the encirclement of Lyman.
So we get to celebrate annexation of Ukrainian lands on the same day as we celebrate the de-annexation of Ukrainian lands.
I´m sure Putin appreciates the Ukrainian efforts to highlight the occasion.

https://twitter.com/Tendar/status/1575584971569258497/photo/1

[Travis]

Russian soldiers brought referendums to several regions in Ukraine.  The choices were:
(A) join Russia
(B) one of the soldiers should shoot me

Most of the surviving voters picked (A).  Those picking (B) were unavailable for comment.

The referendums turned out to be a sad joke. Russia published photos of soldiers going door to door with ballots, election workers counting blank ballots, and the final results changing several times. Putin is expected to declare the occupied areas part of Russia in the next day or so. Whether that actually means anything has some folks nervous.

Looks like an important part of the Russian defensive lines and logistics is in the process of collapsing after the encirclement of Lyman.
So we get to celebrate annexation of Ukrainian lands on the same day as we celebrate the de-annexation of Ukrainian lands.
I´m sure Putin appreciates the Ukrainian efforts to highlight the occasion.

https://twitter.com/Tendar/status/1575584971569258497/photo/1

Ukrainian and Russian sources both agree Lyman is almost completely encircled. Just how many troops are trapped and how long it'll take to kill or capture them is not known, but when its secure the weather and poorly-equipped Russians stand between Ukraine and the Luhansk border.

[PeteD01]

Another calamity for Putin in the domestic propaganda space:

Putin Suffers Most Humiliating Ukraine Defeat Yet
THAT’S AWKWARD

Thousands of Russian troops may be trapped after a rapid-fire Ukrainian counter-attack fought to encircle key strategic city on the very day Putin claims to be annexing it.
Published Sep. 30, 2022 8:28AM ET

Moscow planned to celebrated the annexation of huge swathes of Eastern Ukraine Friday but Putin’s party was wrecked by a lightning counter-attack that may have trapped thousands of his men in a key city supposedly now part of Russia.

Ukrainian sources claimed that the strategic city of Lyman, which has served as a Russian military hub in Donetsk, has been encircled and supply lines cut. “Lyman! The operation to encircle the Russian group is at the stage of completion,” said Ukrainian lawmaker Oleksiy Goncharenko on Friday. The claim could not be independently verified but, if confirmed, it would be one of the most serious Russian military losses of the war so far.


https://www.thedailybeast.com/putin-suffers-most-humiliating-ukraine-defeat-yet-around-key-city-of-lyman-in-donetsk?ref=home

[PeteD01]

Looks like Putin did not mention nukes explicitly in his annexation fantasy speech.
Maybe it did occur to them that a tactical nuclear strike in Ukraine would technically mean that Russia is using nuclear weapons to address a domestic situation, which the war against Ukraine is in their fantasy.
But then, in a world where an American president instigates a violent attack on the legislative branch, attacking a perceived domestic enemy with nuclear weapons on what one perceives ones own soil doesn´t seem to be that much out of line.

[PeteD01]

Looks like Ukraine just received a new type of warhead suitable for soft targets like mass mobilized conscripts. Poor chaps need to be told about that:

Ukraine received new rockets for HIMARS/M270- here we can see a pod of M30A1 guided rockets.
M30A1 differs from previously seen M31A1/A2 by an alternative warhead with 182000 preformed spheroid steel/tungsten fragments and is designed to be used against soft targets.



https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1575843498217144321/photo/1

[Telecaster]

Another calamity for Putin in the domestic propaganda space:

And not just a propaganda calamity.  By design, Russian military logistics relies heavily on rail.   Lyman is a rail hub, and therefore an important logistic center for the Russians. Losing Lyman makes everything more complicated for them.   If Lyman gets cut off like most analysts are indicating will happen soon, Ukraine could capture substantial amounts of Russian equipment and ammunition.

[Just Joe]

Has there ever been a war where the a country captures so much supplies from their bully?

Russia is supplying the Ukrainian war on Russia. 

Also: what is unique about Russia? It seems like they can't move their society beyond being governed by dictators. Is it a cultural defect that favors bullies and the ignorant?

[LennStar]

Has there ever been a war where the a country captures so much supplies from their bully?

Russia is supplying the Ukrainian war on Russia. 

Also: what is unique about Russia? It seems like they can't move their society beyond being governed by dictators. Is it a cultural defect that favors bullies and the ignorant?

In part, yes. But it's also a country full of natural resources.

[pecunia]

Has there ever been a war where the a country captures so much supplies from their bully?

Russia is supplying the Ukrainian war on Russia. 

Also: what is unique about Russia? It seems like they can't move their society beyond being governed by dictators. Is it a cultural defect that favors bullies and the ignorant?

In part, yes. But it's also a country full of natural resources.

Australia is another country that makes big bucks from natural resources, but they still do the Democracy thing.

[former player]

Has there ever been a war where the a country captures so much supplies from their bully?

Russia is supplying the Ukrainian war on Russia. 

Also: what is unique about Russia? It seems like they can't move their society beyond being governed by dictators. Is it a cultural defect that favors bullies and the ignorant?

In part, yes. But it's also a country full of natural resources.

Australia is another country that makes big bucks from natural resources, but they still do the Democracy thing.

Previously colonised by Britain is a reasonable indicator of democracy, and none of the British invasions of Russia worked well enough for that.

(Yes, I know.  Colonialisation bad.)

[PeteD01]

...

Also: what is unique about Russia? It seems like they can't move their society beyond being governed by dictators. Is it a cultural defect that favors bullies and the ignorant?

The Russian Federation's political system is imperial authoritarianism, and if that sounds old fashioned it does so because it is a legacy dating back to tzarist times.
In a nutshell, it is political repression domestically, aggression directed at neighbors and perceived competitors, treatment of federation members other than Russia proper as colonies, and massive corruption as a means of governing.
Top all of that off with a heavy dose of paranoia and general grievance, and you are closer in understanding the Russian Federation and why getting rid of Putin falls way short of a lasting solution that must include the end of Russian imperial authoritarianism.

[GuitarStv]

"Why does one save for retirement? In essence, Scott said, it’s because you want to have the same standard of living when you’re not working as you did while you were working."

The easiest way to have a consistent standard of living is to never get in the habit of wasting money.  There's no reason to consume more just because you have the money to do so.  That also allows you to retire much earlier.

[zolotiyeruki]

"Why does one save for retirement? In essence, Scott said, it’s because you want to have the same standard of living when you’re not working as you did while you were working."

The easiest way to have a consistent standard of living is to never get in the habit of wasting money.  There's no reason to consume more just because you have the money to do so.  That also allows you to retire much earlier.

I think you may have responded in a thread other than the one you intended...

[MustacheAndaHalf]

Russian soldiers brought referendums to several regions in Ukraine.  The choices were:
(A) join Russia
(B) one of the soldiers should shoot me

Most of the surviving voters picked (A).  Those picking (B) were unavailable for comment.

The referendums turned out to be a sad joke. Russia published photos of soldiers going door to door with ballots, election workers counting blank ballots, and the final results changing several times. Putin is expected to declare the occupied areas part of Russia in the next day or so. Whether that actually means anything has some folks nervous.

Every news channel carried that story earlier today - he's announced it.  I kept changing the channels, because it's bullshit.  But the media love to eat that up, playing right into Putin's desire to get his message out.

A former oligarch who is now Putin's #1 enemy said Putin wants to stay alive.  If Putin loses power, he's dead.  The biggest fear for Putin is appearing weak by losing the areas Russia invaded.  Putin will get more desperate the more territory he loses.

I think the U.S. should have fighters and longer range missiles ready for Ukraine.  If Russia's methods cross a red line, the faster the response the better.

[BicycleB]

Has there ever been a war where the a country captures so much supplies from their bully?

Russia is supplying the Ukrainian war on Russia. 

Also: what is unique about Russia? It seems like they can't move their society beyond being governed by dictators. Is it a cultural defect that favors bullies and the ignorant?

The Russian Federation's political system is imperial authoritarianism, and if that sounds old fashioned it does so because it is a legacy dating back to tzarist times.
In a nutshell, it is political repression domestically, aggression directed at neighbors and perceived competitors, treatment of federation members other than Russia proper as colonies, and massive corruption as a means of governing.
Top all of that off with a heavy dose of paranoia and general grievance, and you are closer in understanding the Russian Federation and why getting rid of Putin falls way short of a lasting solution that must include the end of Russian imperial authoritarianism.

I was going to write, but @PeteD01 said it better than I could!

There's some cultural pride in things like toughness, elite culture, religious value in some quarters. But the system historically has been closer to empire mediated by mafia rule than to a democracy. Even its populist (specifically communist) revolution had leaders and cadres that seized control, rather than a broad popular uprising, I think.

In any case after the communist collapse, control by force with a fig leaf of modern trappings - a modernized corrupt mafia, if you will -  proved dominant in conditions of chaos because the joint traditions of capitalism by the small folk and democracy by the small folk were absent. Similarly the institutions that keep capitalism in check, like accounting standards and SEC and so on, were weak to nonexistent. So bringing order out of chaos by strength was a respectable pattern when Putin took charge.

TL;DR - It's institutions (or lack thereof) as well as culture.

[GuitarStv]

"Why does one save for retirement? In essence, Scott said, it’s because you want to have the same standard of living when you’re not working as you did while you were working."

The easiest way to have a consistent standard of living is to never get in the habit of wasting money.  There's no reason to consume more just because you have the money to do so.  That also allows you to retire much earlier.

I think you may have responded in a thread other than the one you intended...

TAB FAILURE!

[former player]

Has there ever been a war where the a country captures so much supplies from their bully?

Russia is supplying the Ukrainian war on Russia. 

Also: what is unique about Russia? It seems like they can't move their society beyond being governed by dictators. Is it a cultural defect that favors bullies and the ignorant?

The Russian Federation's political system is imperial authoritarianism, and if that sounds old fashioned it does so because it is a legacy dating back to tzarist times.
In a nutshell, it is political repression domestically, aggression directed at neighbors and perceived competitors, treatment of federation members other than Russia proper as colonies, and massive corruption as a means of governing.
Top all of that off with a heavy dose of paranoia and general grievance, and you are closer in understanding the Russian Federation and why getting rid of Putin falls way short of a lasting solution that must include the end of Russian imperial authoritarianism.

I was going to write, but @PeteD01 said it better than I could!

There's some cultural pride in things like toughness, elite culture, religious value in some quarters. But the system historically has been closer to empire mediated by mafia rule than to a democracy. Even its populist (specifically communist) revolution had leaders and cadres that seized control, rather than a broad popular uprising, I think.

In any case after the communist collapse, control by force with a fig leaf of modern trappings - a modernized corrupt mafia, if you will -  proved dominant in conditions of chaos because the joint traditions of capitalism by the small folk and democracy by the small folk were absent. Similarly the institutions that keep capitalism in check, like accounting standards and SEC and so on, were weak to nonexistent. So bringing order out of chaos by strength was a respectable pattern when Putin took charge.

TL;DR - It's institutions (or lack thereof) as well as culture.

Back in the early 1990s I was at a meeting with the then Russian Minister for the Environment.  I explained how part of the UK law on environmental protection worked, and was asked in return "but what stops the government from just changing its mind and not doing that?"  He had no concept of the idea that a government could be subject to the laws made by Parliament and that independent courts of law would enforce those laws against the government.  It just wasn't part of his education, his experience or his world view.  There was just a complete failure on either of our parts to understand the system the other worked in.  Nothing on that has changed in Russia, sadly any change there has been is UK politicians drifting away from wanting to follow the rule of law.

[pecunia]

Has there ever been a war where the a country captures so much supplies from their bully?

Russia is supplying the Ukrainian war on Russia. 

Also: what is unique about Russia? It seems like they can't move their society beyond being governed by dictators. Is it a cultural defect that favors bullies and the ignorant?

The Russian Federation's political system is imperial authoritarianism, and if that sounds old fashioned it does so because it is a legacy dating back to tzarist times.
In a nutshell, it is political repression domestically, aggression directed at neighbors and perceived competitors, treatment of federation members other than Russia proper as colonies, and massive corruption as a means of governing.
Top all of that off with a heavy dose of paranoia and general grievance, and you are closer in understanding the Russian Federation and why getting rid of Putin falls way short of a lasting solution that must include the end of Russian imperial authoritarianism.

I was going to write, but @PeteD01 said it better than I could!

There's some cultural pride in things like toughness, elite culture, religious value in some quarters. But the system historically has been closer to empire mediated by mafia rule than to a democracy. Even its populist (specifically communist) revolution had leaders and cadres that seized control, rather than a broad popular uprising, I think.

In any case after the communist collapse, control by force with a fig leaf of modern trappings - a modernized corrupt mafia, if you will -  proved dominant in conditions of chaos because the joint traditions of capitalism by the small folk and democracy by the small folk were absent. Similarly the institutions that keep capitalism in check, like accounting standards and SEC and so on, were weak to nonexistent. So bringing order out of chaos by strength was a respectable pattern when Putin took charge.

TL;DR - It's institutions (or lack thereof) as well as culture.

Back in the early 1990s I was at a meeting with the then Russian Minister for the Environment.  I explained how part of the UK law on environmental protection worked, and was asked in return "but what stops the government from just changing its mind and not doing that?"  He had no concept of the idea that a government could be subject to the laws made by Parliament and that independent courts of law would enforce those laws against the government.  It just wasn't part of his education, his experience or his world view.  There was just a complete failure on either of our parts to understand the system the other worked in.  Nothing on that has changed in Russia, sadly any change there has been is UK politicians drifting away from wanting to follow the rule of law.

OK - So Ukraine shares a lot of culture with the Russians.  In fact they have a lot of Russians living in Ukraine.  Yet, they seem hell bent on establishing a working Democracy like most of the folks in Europe have.  Then there is Poland and the Baltic states.  They too are widely into the Democracy thing.  These countries were exposed to Russian thinking for hundreds of years.  It's been a virtual mind meld.  How come they have been able to think outside the box whereas the folks in Moscow still seem to want a government like in the days of the Romanovs?

Also - What's with their two headed mutant chicken?

[Abe]

All those states were vassals of the Russian empire. Hence an interest in avoiding being ruled by an imperium again.  I think you over-estimate their similarities.

[lost_in_the_endless_aisle]

Has there ever been a war where the a country captures so much supplies from their bully?

Russia is supplying the Ukrainian war on Russia. 

Also: what is unique about Russia? It seems like they can't move their society beyond being governed by dictators. Is it a cultural defect that favors bullies and the ignorant?

The Russian Federation's political system is imperial authoritarianism, and if that sounds old fashioned it does so because it is a legacy dating back to tzarist times.
In a nutshell, it is political repression domestically, aggression directed at neighbors and perceived competitors, treatment of federation members other than Russia proper as colonies, and massive corruption as a means of governing.
Top all of that off with a heavy dose of paranoia and general grievance, and you are closer in understanding the Russian Federation and why getting rid of Putin falls way short of a lasting solution that must include the end of Russian imperial authoritarianism.

I was going to write, but @PeteD01 said it better than I could!

There's some cultural pride in things like toughness, elite culture, religious value in some quarters. But the system historically has been closer to empire mediated by mafia rule than to a democracy. Even its populist (specifically communist) revolution had leaders and cadres that seized control, rather than a broad popular uprising, I think.

In any case after the communist collapse, control by force with a fig leaf of modern trappings - a modernized corrupt mafia, if you will -  proved dominant in conditions of chaos because the joint traditions of capitalism by the small folk and democracy by the small folk were absent. Similarly the institutions that keep capitalism in check, like accounting standards and SEC and so on, were weak to nonexistent. So bringing order out of chaos by strength was a respectable pattern when Putin took charge.

TL;DR - It's institutions (or lack thereof) as well as culture.

Back in the early 1990s I was at a meeting with the then Russian Minister for the Environment.  I explained how part of the UK law on environmental protection worked, and was asked in return "but what stops the government from just changing its mind and not doing that?"  He had no concept of the idea that a government could be subject to the laws made by Parliament and that independent courts of law would enforce those laws against the government.  It just wasn't part of his education, his experience or his world view.  There was just a complete failure on either of our parts to understand the system the other worked in.  Nothing on that has changed in Russia, sadly any change there has been is UK politicians drifting away from wanting to follow the rule of law.

OK - So Ukraine shares a lot of culture with the Russians.  In fact they have a lot of Russians living in Ukraine.  Yet, they seem hell bent on establishing a working Democracy like most of the folks in Europe have.  Then there is Poland and the Baltic states.  They too are widely into the Democracy thing.  These countries were exposed to Russian thinking for hundreds of years.  It's been a virtual mind meld.  How come they have been able to think outside the box whereas the folks in Moscow still seem to want a government like in the days of the Romanovs?

Also - What's with their two headed mutant chicken?

It's simple; unlike much of eastern Europe, Russia is culturally essentially a Mongol Khanate. Russia is not westernized and never meaningfully experienced the Renaissance (this was my travelogue from my last visit in 2017).

[Travis]

Also - What's with their two headed mutant chicken?

Call back to imperial Rome/Byzantium. "Czar" is a Russian version of "Caesar."

[BicycleB]

OK - So Ukraine shares a lot of culture with the Russians.  In fact they have a lot of Russians living in Ukraine.  Yet, they seem hell bent on establishing a working Democracy like most of the folks in Europe have.  Then there is Poland and the Baltic states.  They too are widely into the Democracy thing.  These countries were exposed to Russian thinking for hundreds of years.  It's been a virtual mind meld.  How come they have been able to think outside the box whereas the folks in Moscow still seem to want a government like in the days of the Romanovs?

Great answers already!

Poland and the Baltic states were exposed to imperial Russian thinking, but they also had their own societies, especially in Poland's case. Each has its own language, cultural history with a mere overlay of Russian invasion. Bear in mind Russia had serfs for centuries longer than the West. It was much slower to develop native power centers/ institutions/ etc. between king and commoner.

Poland and Lithuania by contrast were actually a breeding ground for a remarkably vibrant early form of widespread democracy in 1500s through 1700s. To us now "elected kings" and a large class of voting "nobles" (the day's equivalent of, say, software devs and McDonald's managers and owners of small apartment complexes?) seem weird but at the time it was a much wider distribution of power than divine right of kings, a big turnaround where power flowed up rather than down. The great democracy of Britain, progenitor of mighty USA, arguably arrived at a similar point (Parliament in charge, choosing the king - the "Glorious Revolution") later than Poland by about 130 years. A few generations later Casimir Pulaski, the father of American cavalry, brought that tradition of martial democratic horse ridin' nobles from its home in Poland to support the US colonies' revolution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Poland#Polish%E2%80%93Lithuanian_Commonwealth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution#Assessment_and_historiography
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_Pulaski

PS. "Seem to want" and "want" are two different things. "Seem" is in the eye of the beholder. My impression of Russia, partly from personal but limited reports through a friend, is plenty of Russians want some satisfying form of democracy. They just don't have a visible option for it right now. Nor have experience of it working.

[former player]

OK - So Ukraine shares a lot of culture with the Russians.  In fact they have a lot of Russians living in Ukraine.  Yet, they seem hell bent on establishing a working Democracy like most of the folks in Europe have.  Then there is Poland and the Baltic states.  They too are widely into the Democracy thing.  These countries were exposed to Russian thinking for hundreds of years.  It's been a virtual mind meld.  How come they have been able to think outside the box whereas the folks in Moscow still seem to want a government like in the days of the Romanovs?

Great answers already!

Poland and the Baltic states were exposed to imperial Russian thinking, but they also had their own societies, especially in Poland's case. Each has its own language, cultural history with a mere overlay of Russian invasion. Bear in mind Russia had serfs for centuries longer than the West. It was much slower to develop native power centers/ institutions/ etc. between king and commoner.

Poland and Lithuania by contrast were actually a breeding ground for a remarkably vibrant early form of widespread democracy in 1500s through 1700s. To us now "elected kings" and a large class of voting "nobles" (the day's equivalent of, say, software devs and McDonald's managers and owners of small apartment complexes?) seem weird but at the time it was a much wider distribution of power than divine right of kings, a big turnaround where power flowed up rather than down. The great democracy of Britain, progenitor of mighty USA, arguably arrived at a similar point (Parliament in charge, choosing the king - the "Glorious Revolution") later than Poland by about 130 years. A few generations later Casimir Pulaski, the father of American cavalry, brought that tradition of martial democratic horse ridin' nobles from its home in Poland to support the US colonies' revolution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Poland#Polish%E2%80%93Lithuanian_Commonwealth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution#Assessment_and_historiography
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_Pulaski

PS. "Seem to want" and "want" are two different things. "Seem" is in the eye of the beholder. My impression of Russia, partly from personal but limited reports through a friend, is plenty of Russians want some satisfying form of democracy. They just don't have a visible option for it right now. Nor have experience of it working.

Politicians quite naturally tend to emphasise the "elections" part of democracy, and that emphasis passes down into general discourse.  Just as important or even more important than choosing who leads a country is determining whether or not that person complies with the law.   (When you hear the phrase "the rule of law" it doesn't just mean the general population being subject to laws fairly made and enforced, it means the rulers also being subject to those laws and ruling in compliance with the law rather than their whim.)  Elections help massively with the rule of law for many reasons, from leaders not being in power too long to subvert the law to knowing that when they leave power they will need the protection of the law.  But if rulers, elected or not, do not have to comply with the law then they are effectively dictators ruling by whim and by force.

The big thing that made England a democracy long before the Glorious Revolution in 1688 was Magna Carta in 1215, the document which forced the King and his advisers to comply with those rights, and with enforcement of those rights through independent courts of law.  If the King can only act in accordance with the law and the law will be enforced by the courts then it matters much less that he is not elected, because the benefits of having an elected leader are being provided through the law, and the leader, even if unelected, has to behave more like an elected leader than a dictator.

Whoever rules Russia will do so as a dictator, whether it is Putin or not, because they don't have the rule of law and there is no practical or political way of changing that at the moment.

(The rule of law is in trouble in the USA at the moment.  Look to your own house on this, America.)

[LennStar]

Has there ever been a war where the a country captures so much supplies from their bully?

Russia is supplying the Ukrainian war on Russia. 

Also: what is unique about Russia? It seems like they can't move their society beyond being governed by dictators. Is it a cultural defect that favors bullies and the ignorant?

In part, yes. But it's also a country full of natural resources.

Australia is another country that makes big bucks from natural resources, but they still do the Democracy thing.

Of course this was a statistical argument. And as others pointed out, Australia was a colony of a democracy when founded and released as a democracy.
It's relativly easy to keep being one, but hard to change into a democracy. And for resources-dependend countries it's far harder.

[TomTX]

Looks like Ukraine just received a new type of warhead suitable for soft targets like mass mobilized conscripts. Poor chaps need to be told about that:

Ukraine received new rockets for HIMARS/M270- here we can see a pod of M30A1 guided rockets.
M30A1 differs from previously seen M31A1/A2 by an alternative warhead with 182000 preformed spheroid steel/tungsten fragments and is designed to be used against soft targets.

https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1575843498217144321/photo/1

Any non-armored vehicle (say, fuel trucks) will be trashed by the M30A1. Maybe even lightly armored vehicles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yC4QAl5In8