Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments

[The Eagle]

Sorry, but the @Oldman1 does have a point. Back in Desert Storm, we were briefed as to what qualified as a legal combatant, because, like it or not, Muslim militaries do not see any separation between 'soldier' and 'civilian'. That may offends some people but that is for a different debate. I still have my folder of that brief to this day.

A retreating enemy force DOES NOT qualify as "hors de combat" or out of action, especially if that enemy force is still fully armed, which the retreating Iraqi force were.

The tank busters had a question regarding the tank's legitimacy as a target. The tank is treated like a rifle. If the crew is out of the tank, that would be the equivalent of an infantryman dropping his rifle. That would be hors de combat. But if the tank is rolling, we do not know if the tank is still ammo-ed and/or under orders to conduct combat, hence, a rolling tank is a legitimate target, even if the tank is rolling in retreat. If any moving vehicle display the white flag, which is universally regarded as a signal to surrender, then it is up to the individual to make the call and situations like this are problematic. A tank is an offensive platform. A car is not, even though it can be turned into a weapon. A rolling tank displaying a white flag would not convince anyone that it is hors de combat, even if the crew is outside on the shell. So for any vehicle that was originally designed for combat, the best way for the crew to survive is to abandon it.

In order to fully qualify as hors de combat you must be VISIBLY disarmed. In the case of an airborne combatant, like my F-16, dropping the landing gear is a VISIBLE sign of taking myself out of combat. The moment I raise gear, that is a sign that I put myself back into combatant status.

Gambit my friend, what happened in Afghanistan killing children in drone strikes or unarmed civilian in field by Aussies does explain well of separation. But, but..... That's not the topic here.. time for us to pay attention to the subject.

 

[maverick1977]

Russian Banks will be taken off line from financial communication network under SWIFT from Monday. New sanctions just announced on CNN.
This will hurt Russia as they wont be able to trade and transact with international banks.
Most likely they will move to Chinese netowkr, but not sure how big that network is ?

 

[The Eagle]

That means Russia will win militarily but lose economically.

Interesting but I think, Russia might loose everything given the Indian factor. This particular guy is from Tamil Nadu and Tamils don't like India. Therefore, Russian loss may be bigger since India supports them. Ukraine may gain something.

Let's hope sanity prevail otherwise, both are caught in a tight position. Modi is everywhere.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Does Ukraine Use Turkish Drones? Does the Russia Ukraine Crisis Affect the Turkish Defense Industry?​

A decent video presentation in Turkish with English subtitle:

 

[Wergeland]

I think people look at all the fancy flags and panic

No not at all.
Been following this forum for ages.
Dont wanna dwell any deeper into that coz its off topic. But lets just say sometime where something is stationed has some positives/negatives with it. What i mean is the server, which i believe is based is the United States.

 

[RescueRanger]

Sorry, but the @Oldman1 does have a point. Back in Desert Storm, we were briefed as to what qualified as a legal combatant, because, like it or not, Muslim militaries do not see any separation between 'soldier' and 'civilian'. That may offends some people but that is for a different debate. I still have my folder of that brief to this day.

A retreating enemy force DOES NOT qualify as "hors de combat" or out of action, especially if that enemy force is still fully armed, which the retreating Iraqi force were.

The tank busters had a question regarding the tank's legitimacy as a target. The tank is treated like a rifle. If the crew is out of the tank, that would be the equivalent of an infantryman dropping his rifle. That would be hors de combat. But if the tank is rolling, we do not know if the tank is still ammo-ed and/or under orders to conduct combat, hence, a rolling tank is a legitimate target, even if the tank is rolling in retreat. If any moving vehicle display the white flag, which is universally regarded as a signal to surrender, then it is up to the individual to make the call and situations like this are problematic. A tank is an offensive platform. A car is not, even though it can be turned into a weapon. A rolling tank displaying a white flag would not convince anyone that it is hors de combat, even if the crew is outside on the shell. So for any vehicle that was originally designed for combat, the best way for the crew to survive is to abandon it.

In order to fully qualify as hors de combat you must be VISIBLY disarmed. In the case of an airborne combatant, like my F-16, dropping the landing gear is a VISIBLE sign of taking myself out of combat. The moment I raise gear, that is a sign that I put myself back into combatant status.

"journalist Seymour Hersh, citing American witnesses, alleged that a platoon of U.S. Bradley Fighting Vehicles from the 1st Brigade, 24th Infantry Division opened fire on a large group of more than 350 disarmed Iraqi soldiers who had surrendered at a makeshift military checkpoint after fleeing the devastation on Highway 8 on February 27, apparently hitting some or all of them. The U.S. Military Intelligence personnel who were manning the checkpoint claimed they too were fired on from the same vehicles and barely fled by car during the incident."

Source:

Overwhelming Force

ANNALS OF WAR about the Persian Gulf War, and reports by servicement of massacres which took place under the command of Gen. Barry McCaffrey...

www.newyorker.com

 

[Ali_Baba]

Just picked these two EF2000 returning from Poland.

Most likely went out to protect the latest C17 drop to Poland of weapons.

 

[LeGenD]

You believe every single word the West tells you?

These actions have resulted in the death of millions, and the destruction of whole countries.

Ad hominem noticed.

No, I do my homework (check information on hand) and my judgement calls are in accordance. These conflicts materialized due to irrational (and dictatorial) politics of the leader(s) of the mentioned countries which led to regional conflicts and drew NATO into them (cascading effects). The death and destruction that followed in each case is most unfortunate and deplorable. This was already happening in some regions before NATO showed up.

I called out on cheap point-scoring as a means of rationalizing Russian aggression in Ukraine.

How can WE draw the line between right and wrong with selective rationalization of everything questionable out there?

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

At the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the majority of Crimean voted in a referendum to join Ukraine.

After a democratically elected President of Ukraine was ousted in 2014, the mainly Russian speaking population of Crimea changed their mind and voted again in another referendum to join Russia.
So what is wrong with that?
What annexation?

Historically Crimea was never part of Ukraine. So Crimea has a choice.

That is real democracy.

Folks in here like to talk a lot about freedom and democracy without the understanding of what real democracy is all about.

Watch the video to the end before jumping to conclusion.

The argument is coherent and logical. We don't need to agree or disagree.

We only need to use the right side of our brain.

 

[RescueRanger]

Very bad comparison, if we wanted to kill the Afghan children, they would all be dead, not 20 years later and people scrambling for their lives even cling on to C-17s on the outside asking Afghan children murderers to take them to go back to the states.

Oh please, drop the sanctimonious act! It doesn't carry very far!

 

[Clutch]

There are only 300 or so ‘nazis’ in Azov out of thousands. They behave like gangsters and blackmail politicians for money. They are also funded by externals powers, but it’s not fair to say all of Azov are ‘Nazis’.

Most of the attacks on Muslims in the West and also many in Germany were done by people who visited or have allegiance with the Ukrainian Azov and also covert Ukranian Zelensky government support. It's been a breeding ground for resurgence of White Nationalism and Nazism.

Even the New Zealand mosque attacker had Ukrainian links.

 

[RescueRanger]

No not at all.
Been following this forum for ages.
Dont wanna dwell any deeper into that coz its off topic. But lets just say sometime where something is stationed has some positives/negatives with it. What i mean is the server, which i believe is based is the United States.

Fair enough.

 

[jamal18]

Polish are quite racist that's why they a good beating in the UK every day.

I have heard that. However I have worked with a lot of them, and in my personal interaction found them to be friendly and polite.

 

[gambit]

Gambit my friend, what happened in Afghanistan killing children in drone strikes or unarmed civilian in field by Aussies does explain well of separation. But, but..... That's not the topic here.. time for us to pay attention to the subject.

if you want to get technical and legal, a 'civilian' can still be a legal combatant. The correct word is 'non-combatant'. But we can use 'civilian' to be 'non-combatant' for ease of discussion. I know that people love to levy the war crime charge at US but am going to indulge the discussion.

The deaths of civilians in an attack can be construed as a war crime IF the intention was to kill civilians. Yes, I know people are going to gleefully jump in with the US bombing in WW II as the typical 'Gotcha' moment. But the current Geneva Convention as enforcible laws were created post WW II. So let us remain on topic.

If civilian deaths were accidental or 'collateral damages', then even though the event itself can be construed as a war crime, the attacker(s) cannot be charged with a war crime. Flawed intelligence is on the receiving side, not from the source. So when/if the attackers were given flawed intelligence when the intel were deliberately deceitful, the attacker(s) cannot be charged with a war crime.

 

[PakAlp]

Yes but Ukraine is different from Afghanistan because the Russian culture and the Ukrainian culture are similar. The cultural difference between Afghans and the democratic culture that the US wanted to impose on them was huge, particularly religiously. Plus, Russians are right there next to Ukraine. They haven't come to Ukraine from ten thousands of miles away. They're just right there and they can continue to support their puppet government. Plus, they will take written guarantees from Ukraine about their neutrality and they can always find an excuse to interfere again.

True but Iraq was also the same. Pro Saddam parties are in the dustbin and Kurds/Shias are the ruling power. In Afghanistan the NA was a small and weak and Usa only option was to bring them to power but they failed miserably. For 20 years they trained Afghan soldiers in 300,000+ numbers but they disappeared as soon as Nato left. In Iraq the USA installed government/army is still in power.

Back to Ukraine, the new government must have grassroot level support which they only have in the East and South (unless I am incorrect). Russia certainly must have done their homework otherwise they will be in big trouble.