Europe at War

[drogulus]

     U.S. Intelligence Helped Ukraine Strike Russian Flagship, Officials Say

On April 13, Ukrainian forces on the ground fired two Neptune missiles, striking the Moskva and igniting a fire that eventually led to the sinking of the warship. Attention has also focused on whether the aging ship's radar systems were working properly. Ukrainian and U.S. officials said the Moskva was possibly distracted by Ukraine's deploying of a Turkish-made Bayraktar drone nearby.

Immediately after the strike, Biden administration officials were scrupulously silent, declining to confirm even that the Moskva had been struck. But in recent days, American officials confirmed that targeting data from American intelligence sources was provided to Ukraine in the hours before the Neptune missiles were launched.

The officials declined to elaborate on what specific information was passed along, but one official said the information went beyond simply a report on the ship's location in the Black Sea, 65 nautical miles south of Odessa.

     

[Madiel]

     Let's say China launched missiles at Australia and US satellites or drones or whatever provided the GPS coordinates or imaging to precisely target the strike. Don't you think the US would be committing an act of war against your country? I'd be rioting in the streets throwing rocks at the US embassy sporting my puffy "Death to America!" beard.

No, I don't think that, for the same reason that I don't think that Apple or Microsoft or Samsung wrote your post.

You are in fact illustrating perfectly the problem with your own position, where it is possible to blame whoever you FEEL like blaming for their role in what happened, so long as you can manage to  create a chain of causal links for it, while choosing language that completely erases any discussion about how significant the causal links actually are.

You've completely erased any nuance about different levels of responsibility, or even considering whether the technology had a number of different possible uses besides the use you were complaining about.

Describing supply of weapons as being "at war" means you have completely lost the ability to make any distinction between armed forces that are firing weapons and armed forces that are not using the arms in their possession. And frankly that's really fucking dumb overreach.

I've given you any number of practical examples of how no one would apply your logic to everyday life, none of which you acknowledged. You just persist in claiming that supply chains have no functional distinction between the supplier and the recipient.

Which means, by the way, that some posts on this handle are by Apple and Optus whereas others are by a combination of Microsoft, Aussie Broadband, NBN Co and a computer store in Belconnen, and I'm wondering whether you can tell which posts are which.

[Madiel]

     U.S. Intelligence Helped Ukraine Strike Russian Flagship, Officials Say

On April 13, Ukrainian forces on the ground fired two Neptune missiles, striking the Moskva and igniting a fire that eventually led to the sinking of the warship. Attention has also focused on whether the aging ship's radar systems were working properly. Ukrainian and U.S. officials said the Moskva was possibly distracted by Ukraine's deploying of a Turkish-made Bayraktar drone nearby.

Immediately after the strike, Biden administration officials were scrupulously silent, declining to confirm even that the Moskva had been struck. But in recent days, American officials confirmed that targeting data from American intelligence sources was provided to Ukraine in the hours before the Neptune missiles were launched.

The officials declined to elaborate on what specific information was passed along, but one official said the information went beyond simply a report on the ship's location in the Black Sea, 65 nautical miles south of Odessa.

   

Yes. It says Ukrainian forces fired missiles. Your argument that this is exactly the same as American forces firing the missiles is silly. If everyone thought the way you're thinking then World War Three would have happened long ago. People actually learned to STOP thinking like this precisely because your sort of thinking contributed to World War One.

[drogulus]

No, I don't think that,

     Helping the Chinese attack your country seems pretty warlike.

     

Yes. It says Ukrainian forces fired missiles. Your argument that this is exactly the same as American forces firing the missiles is silly. If everyone thought the way you're thinking then World War Three would have happened long ago. People actually learned to STOP thinking like this precisely because your sort of thinking contributed to World War One.

     I didn't say it was exactly the same, just that targeting warships and Russian generals are acts of war. You can scale aiming the gun and pulling the trigger however you see fit.

[Madiel]

     Helping the Chinese attack your country seems pretty warlike.

But helped HOW? You simply seem to have papered over a vast range of options. I mean, GPS is a system that was set up by the US government but is used by billions of people every damn day. And blaming America for every single thing that involves GPS somehow, and expecting me to jump to that conclusion on the strength of a brief description you sketched out in less than 2 lines, is inordinately unsubtle and stupid.

[Madiel]

     
     I didn't say it was exactly the same, just that targeting warships and Russian generals are acts of war. You can scale aiming the gun and pulling the trigger however you see fit.

You did say it was exactly the same, because "at war" is the highest level available. There is no linguistic option where Ukraine is At War with Russia but the USA is at war* with Russia.  You collapsed the levels of involvement into a single kind of terminology. And that is exactly why I and others have been criticising you.

Its kind of ironic of course, given that Russia flatly denies being at war with ANYONE, that you are so eager to add to the list of combatants.

[Que]

Putin hasn't even had his 9th May victory parade yet, and it is already clear that his renewed offensive is going nowhere...

https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-may-5

Ukraine is pushing back around Kharkiv and Izyum, but has announced there will be no large counter offensive before June.

It seems time is in Ukraine's favour. Putin's Belorussian buddy Lukashenko has already pointed out that this is all taking very long.. .

[Florestan]

According to drogulus, we are in the early phase of WWIII, which is fought between Russia on one side and a Ukraine-NATO coalition on the other side. Well, I know at least one other poster who might agree. I disagree.

[71 dB]

According to drogulus, we are in the early phase of WWIII, which is fought between Russia on one side and a Ukraine-NATO coalition on the other side. Well, I know at least one other poster who might agree. I disagree.

Whether or not this war in Ukraine leads to WWIII, I fear for the near future. Populism is on the rise all over the World. Social media creates bubbles. People are ignorant, but have strong opinions anyway. It means that bad leaders are elected and bad leaders means more war... 

[Florestan]

Whether or not this war in Ukraine leads to WWIII, I fear for the near future. Populism is on the rise all over the World. Social media creates bubbles. People are ignorant, but have strong opinions anyway. It means that bad leaders are elected and bad leaders means more war... 

Here, take this antidepressant: https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,29166.msg1443698.html#msg1443698. 

[Florestan]

Drogulus' theory is easily refuted with the help of a historical example: the Spanish Civil War, 1936-39. It was a war in which not only both sides were supplied with weapons by third parties, but those third parties were actively involved in the actual fightings. Yet no historian has ever called it otherwise than the Spanish Civil War.

[LKB]

The war in Ukraine is neither a proxy war nor WWIII.

It may evolve into a greater and/or more complex conflict, depending on Putin's willingness to strike other non-Nato states, or resort to wmds ( A lot of press lately regarding nuclear, very little regarding chemical/biological, both of which would be more deniable ).

Supplying significant material support to a combatant doesn't make you a participant. I doubt there's a single historian anywhere who would consider the United States' entry into WWII to be the start of the Lend-Lease program.

[71 dB]

Here, take this antidepressant: https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,29166.msg1443698.html#msg1443698. 

Thanks, but it makes me even more depressing to know my Goyescas aren't the best there is...

[Madiel]

The war in Ukraine is neither a proxy war nor WWIII.

It may evolve into a greater and/or more complex conflict, depending on Putin's willingness to strike other non-Nato states, or resort to wmds ( A lot of press lately regarding nuclear, very little regarding chemical/biological, both of which would be more deniable ).

Supplying significant material support to a combatant doesn't make you a participant. I doubt there's a single historian anywhere who would consider the United States' entry into WWII to be the start of the Lend-Lease program.

Well said.

[drogulus]

But helped HOW? You simply seem to have papered over a vast range of options. I mean, GPS is a system that was set up by the US government but is used by billions of people every damn day. And blaming America for every single thing that involves GPS somehow, and expecting me to jump to that conclusion on the strength of a brief description you sketched out in less than 2 lines, is inordinately unsubtle and stupid.

     I gave you the example in which China fires a missile guided by targeting information from the US military. The fact that the GPS tech has civilian uses is not relevant. It could be NSA intercepts and satellite imaging, or a spy drone piloted by a guy in Utah. The point is your generals are killed and your warship is sunk by the combined efforts of your Chinese trigger puller aided by US aiming for their joint purpose.

The war in Ukraine is neither a proxy war nor WWIII.

     I agree. It's in the middle somewhere.

Supplying significant material support to a combatant doesn't make you a participant. I doubt there's a single historian anywhere who would consider the United States' entry into WWII to be the start of the Lend-Lease program.

     Declarations of war were still a thing in the '40s. It would depend on what questions you asked about US involvement in China, or the sinking of US shipping by German subs, or Lend Lease.




     

[Todd]

The war in Ukraine is neither a proxy war nor WWIII.

It is a proxy war for the US.

Supplying significant material support to a combatant doesn't make you a participant.

The US has done more than that.  The US has begun publicly taking credit for providing intelligence that led to the killing of Russian generals and the sinking of the Moskva. 

As to your claim about historians and what they may or may not think, literally eight seconds of googling provided this: The Undeclared War: How the Lend Lease Act of 1941 Signaled America's Entry into World War II by one Aaron Griffin.  I suspect there are many historians outside of the western world who take a rather different view than western scholars on this topic.

[drogulus]

     I can imagine a legalistic definition of war that let's some of the supposedly noncombatant parties claim "I come in almost peace" or some such nonsense. US "advisors" in Ukraine, the ones who aren't exactly there, can be dismissed as rumors or propaganda.

     There is no equivalent to the nonintervention agreements of the Spanish Civil War. Such agreements that we have are of the interventionist kind, though combat is limited to what is deniable.

[Florestan]

Thanks, but it makes me even more depressing to know my Goyescas aren't the best there is...

Wooops, my bad! 

To repair it, I can let you have the Berthold in FLAC and booklet. Just PM me if interested.

And if not, don't worry: the best anything is the one that you enjoy. 

[Florestan]

         There is no equivalent to the nonintervention agreements of the Spanish Civil War.

What are you talking about? Germany and Italy openly intervened on the side of the National camp and the USSR openly intervened on the side of the Republican camp. Yet no historian has ever called that war a Hispano-Germano-Italo-USSR war.

[drogulus]

According to drogulus, we are in the early phase of WWIII, which is fought between Russia on one side and a Ukraine-NATO coalition on the other side. Well, I know at least one other poster who might agree. I disagree.

     If what you have in mind is nuclear war, I don't think that. It's not even clear to me that any nations on the noncombatant list will commit combat forces. I do envision the possibility that Russia may attack other non-NATO countries, though Russian forces may be so depleted by fighting in Ukraine that they no longer have the strength to do it.

What are you talking about? Germany and Italy openly intervened on the side of the National camp and the USSR openly intervened on the side of the Republican camp.

     I'm sure that's why the nonintervention agreements were put in place. Wikipedia says:

During the Spanish Civil War, several countries followed a principle of non-intervention to avoid any potential escalation or possible expansion of the war to other states. That would result in the signing of the Non-Intervention Agreement in August 1936 and the setting up of the Non-Intervention Committee, which first met in September. Primarily arranged by the French and the British governments, the Committee also included the Soviet Union, Fascist Italy, and Nazi Germany. Ultimately, the committee had the support of 27 states.

     So, intervention spawned nonintervention. That makes sense.