How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Lethaface]

2 hours ago, kevinkin said:

It can be, and that's enough for most of the world to make sure Iran's enrichment does not produce weapons grade purity. The vast amount of Iran's electric power comes from fossil fuel. I doubt the Mullahs have gone green all of a sudden.  

Well if they want to have nuclear energy they need to enrich uranium don't they? Maybe you missed what's been going on with regard to that topic for the last couple of decades.

[Haiduk]

20 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

What I understood is that they struck a drone factory.

But explosion of drone factory coincidently has summoned 5.9-points earthquake, so, reportedly some powerful was destroyed deep under the ground. Also according to RUMINT Russia is going to hand over (or even has handed over already) 20 nuclear warheads to Iran in exchange for huge drones fleet and likely missiles. 

Edited January 29, 2023 by Haiduk

[womble]

16 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

What I understood is that they struck a drone factory. But haven't really dug deep it's Sunday so I had to show up at some football field for 90min + 3rd half

 

The comment you're replying to is part of the sub-sub-thread about "Whether the Stuxnet attack on Iranian Uranium enrichment facilities can be considered a war crime." They've left the current situation quite far behind.

[Lethaface]

5 minutes ago, womble said:

The comment you're replying to is part of the sub-sub-thread about "Whether the Stuxnet attack on Iranian Uranium enrichment facilities can be considered a war crime." They've left the current situation quite far behind.

Ah lol thx I missed overlooked that  
I don't know whether I'd consider it as a warcrime. It's a complicated story and I can recommend everyone reading the book 'Countdown to zero days'. Don't know if / how many civilians got killed because of it. There are also quite regular assassinations of Iranian researchers/etc. 
I do think that the way the West has treated Iran came to bite back. And probably like anyone with some fair wisdom think Nuclear energy should be available to Iranians although I don't necessarily like the current regime there having access to nuclear weapons.

[Lethaface]

12 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

But explosion of drone factory coincidently has summoned 5.9-points earthquake, so, reportedly some powerful was destroyed deep under the ground. Also according to RUMINT Russia is going to hand over (or even has handed over already) 20 nuclear warheads to Iran in exchange for huge drones fleet and likely missiles. 

Is that the strike from today/yesterday or another incident? Even with some beers this sounds rather RUMINT++ for me now. And even if Iran has nukes now, it's not like other countries including Israel don't have them so I'm not too afraid that they'll deploy a nuclear weapon.

[billbindc]

5 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Is that the strike from today/yesterday or another incident? Even with some beers this sounds rather RUMINT++ for me now. And even if Iran has nukes now, it's not like other countries including Israel don't have them so I'm not too afraid that they'll deploy a nuclear weapon.

The idea that Russia would hand over 20 nukes to Iran is frankly preposterous. There's nothing Iran could give Russia that holds even remotely equivalent value and it would have epochal effects on Russian/Israeli relations. I suppose nothing is impossible but this is as close as it gets. 

[kevinkin]

40 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Well if they want to have nuclear energy they need to enrich uranium don't they? Maybe you missed what's been going on with regard to that topic for the last couple of decades.

Why sure. But why bother when you have so much fossil fuel to burn. Do you think Iran's leadership cares about the planet? Plus "A nuclear-armed Iran would dramatically change the balance of power in the Middle East, weakening US influence. It could also encourage other Middle Eastern nations to develop nuclear weapons of their own further reducing US influence in a critical region."

Not to mention passing a weapon to non-state actors. Just a nightmare. And it's not that these will be used, it's the blackmail associated with having then in the wrong hands. Look how a nuclear armed Russian has been able to survive just based on the threat. Conventionally, they have been relegated to the lowest tier based on their 2022 season. 

Edited January 29, 2023 by kevinkin

[Zeleban]

8 minutes ago, billbindc said:

The idea that Russia would hand over 20 nukes to Iran is frankly preposterous. There's nothing Iran could give Russia that holds even remotely equivalent value and it would have epochal effects on Russian/Israeli relations. I suppose nothing is impossible but this is as close as it gets. 

We don't know what exactly Iran gave Moscow. It could be a stockpile of ballistic missiles that Russia needs so badly. In addition, the alliance with Iran gives the Russians the impression that they are not alone in their struggle (and I know from my own experience that this feeling is worth a lot) If a seemingly insignificant thing, according to Moscow, is needed here and now, then this is actually a significant thing .

[Lethaface]

3 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

Why sure. But why bother when you have so much fossil fuel to burn. Do you think Iran's leadership cares about the planet? Plus "A nuclear-armed Iran would dramatically change the balance of power in the Middle East, weakening US influence. It could also encourage other Middle Eastern nations to develop nuclear weapons of their own further reducing US influence in a critical region."

Not to mention passing a weapon to non-state actors. Just a nightmare. 

Do you care about the planet? I'm not so sure how much it would change the power balance in the Middle East. Anyway I'm not 'pro-Iranian nukes' but they (Iranians) are people like any and all of us. Their leadership is scheize but that's not uncommon among Western countries. Fortunately we are usually less extreme since a couple of decades, but we made Iran into what it is today. Anyway I digress. Good day.

[Zeleban]

1 hour ago, SteelRain said:

The terminator is back to fight another propagandabattle vs nothing. For a vehicle that entered service in 2021 it looks pretty rusty and worn-out.

https://old.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10nkrp5/operation_of_a_russian_tank_support_fighting/

 

Propaganda work is a hard and thankless job that takes a lot of effort and resources.

[cesmonkey]

I agree with this:

https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/3835113-gates-a-lot-of-us-military-aid-to-ukraine-could-have-been-done-sooner/

Quote

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Sunday that a lot of the U.S.’s military aid to Ukraine “could have been done sooner.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/full-gates-a-lot-of-recent-u-s-support-for-ukraine-could-have-been-done-sooner-162075205792

[kevinkin]

Enjoy the beer. It's 5PM somewhere. 

[Lethaface]

Just now, kevinkin said:

Enjoy the beer. It's 5PM somewhere. 

Thanks
18:20 here

[kevinkin]

8 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

I agree with this:

Likewise. But another beef is NATO airing their differences in public regarding the recent AFV debate. Once they realized they were behind the 8-ball, a public plan should have been announced in unison. I am all for transparency, but optics do matter when many lives are at stake and the possible re-shaping of Europe is left open.

Edited January 29, 2023 by kevinkin

[Vanir Ausf B]

 

[dan/california]

13 hours ago, NamEndedAllen said:

That would be fantastic. Although IF Israel decided now is the time to start a war with Iran, we have an entirely new crisis since the USA is committed to Israel’s defense. A better scenario is an internal attack, suggesting that Iraqis on the brink of a civil war. Kurds might also be the saboteurs. I guess we just have to wait and see. Personally, I don’t think it would be a positive development to have war breakout in the Middle East. Iran would certainly disrupt oil shipments, and the USA, Japan, and Europe would all be economically affected. Politically as well. So let’s hope this stays within Iran - and that it’s drone production and/or exports are curtailed!

An actual open war between the Israel and Iran is a net negative for Ukraine. The combination of dividing the worlds attention and higher oil prices would not be helpful.

1 hour ago, billbindc said:

The idea that Russia would hand over 20 nukes to Iran is frankly preposterous. There's nothing Iran could give Russia that holds even remotely equivalent value and it would have epochal effects on Russian/Israeli relations. I suppose nothing is impossible but this is as close as it gets. 

It is POSSIBLE that Russia is at least discussing giving Iran nukes. I agree with billindc that it is extraordinarily unlikely. For there to be the slightest possibility that this is true several things would have to be happening in Russia. First Russia is actually losing this war MUCH faster that we think it is.  Second, someone took their life in their hands and explained this to Putin bluntly enough the he believed it. Third, whatever Russia is getting in return would have to be credibly capable of reversing the situation. Unless their is evidence that half of the Iranian army is going to be shipped across the Caspian Sea to join the war, I don't buy it. And given the state of things in Iran I think that sort crazed escalation might precipitate the revolution the regime is trying to avoid.

[holoween]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

 

 

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

The original point being made was that if one employs cyber effects in support of a kinetic strike against illegal targets (eg an apartment building) then those cyber activities are also implicated in a legal sense.

That is an incredibly problematic Position though.

IT Turns legal actions Info illegal ones via circumstances outside of the controll of whoever comitted the action.

[billbindc]

18 minutes ago, dan/california said:

An actual open war between the Israel and Iran is a net negative for Ukraine. The combination of dividing the worlds attention and higher oil prices would not be helpful.

It is POSSIBLE that Russia is at least discussing giving Iran nukes. I agree with billindc that it is extraordinarily unlikely. For there to be the slightest possibility that this is true several things would have to be happening in Russia. First Russia is actually losing this war MUCH faster that we think it is.  Second, someone took their life in their hands and explained this to Putin bluntly enough the he believed it. Third, whatever Russia is getting in return would have to be credibly capable of reversing the situation. Unless their is evidence that half of the Iranian army is going to be shipped across the Caspian Sea to join the war, I don't buy it. And given the state of things in Iran I think that sort crazed escalation might precipitate the revolution the regime is trying to avoid.

The aid would have to win the war *and* somehow mitigate the reaction of what few semi-friends Russia still possesses. India and China would both completely freak out. So would Turkey. Israel has importantly refrained from taking Ukraine's side because at the moment, it still believes it needs Russia to keep some stability in Syria. If Russia came within miles of handing over nukes to Iran, Tel Aviv would throw everything it could at the Russians in Ukraine in terms of aid to Kyiv. Those vaunted Iranian missiles would be facing Iron Dome within weeks. 

It's just not going to happen.

[Haiduk]

@sburke

Major Oleg Gorbenko, chief of the staff of 674th separate signal battlion, 98th airborne division, Western military district. Was killed on 28th of April

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

5 hours ago, holoween said:

Ok so uranuim enrichment is now a military installation?

Of course it is.  The uranium is being enriched for military purposes, which means it is a valid target.  A physical attack, that kills every single civilian worker inside the factory, is fine according to the ICC so a cyber attack is as well.

This is a separate issue from doing something which is considered an "act of war".

5 hours ago, holoween said:

Just wondering about the actual distinction you want to make because once you open up from only uniformed soldiers being military targets you quickly run into a slippery slope where eventually your oponents population is a military target because they could contribute to a war effort.

Everything is on a slope, but sometimes not a slippery one.  Attacking a facility that produces the means of war is an acceptable target.

Anyway, we're straying from the point here.  Ukraine is making a novel claim that cyber attacks being conducted by Russia to inflict pain, suffering, and potentially death upon civilians should be considered a War Crime.  Especially when such activities are being done in conjunction with a kinetic War Crime.  They have an excellent case to make and I hope it is successful.

Steve

[Haiduk]

Recently damaged railroad bridge in Svitlodolynske village, 11 km NE from Melitopol, Zaporizhzhia oblast was struck with five HIMARS missiles again during repairing works. As claimed Russian military correspondent, all five missiles hit almost in the same bridge span. Of course, he claims UKR deliberately targeted repair team and five workers died and four were wounded. Afetr his stand-up Kadyrov's Rosgvardiya trooper (Chechen Republic flag on the body armor) appears in the cadre

 

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, holoween said:

 

That is an incredibly problematic Position though.

IT Turns legal actions Info illegal ones via circumstances outside of the controll of whoever comitted the action.

Well yes and no.  First off, lets say after this war is over, they arrest some cyber operator somewhere who did these support actions.  They would face prosecution which would presume them innocent until proven guilty and burden of proof would include whether or not they were aware that their actions in support of Russia would/could be used in the execution of a warcrime. 

Things like Russian actions to date with respect to warcrimes would be considered, as well as what information was available to the cyber guy, and context the cyber operator was operating under.  Were they aware of Russian actions?  Were they coerced against their will?  What was their state of mind?

Then what about the act itself.  Hacking a UA AD system in not a "legal action" under Ukrainian law (or any other for that matter).  If they did so knowing that the RA was using missiles to target civilians, which is a warcrime and therefore they could be considered complicit.   

The bar for this is actually pretty damned high.  We have seen prosecutions of admin clerks at the Nazi deathcamps, who never touched a weapon or did anything but run pay records for the guards.  And they were still found guilty of being an accomplice to warcrimes. 

So right now, if a someone were to be feeding the RA opensource geolocating intelligence - that is perfectly legal cyber activity, but that intel is used to kill illegal targets - yep, that is at least investigable as a warcrime.  In the same way if the person was on the ground phoning the info back to the Russians.  

This is why in the west, while everyone is going on about weapon systems, the professionals are mostly concerned with targeting - we always are.  Targeting is the enterprise that has to turn a commanders intent/military objectives into reality, and it has to be done well inside the LOAC.  That is why lawyers are literally part of the targeting cycle.

Russia on the other hand appears to taking a more "blind drunk" targeting approach and are not even trying to keep the process above board.  We have literally entered into the "Who Gives a F#ck Because We are Russia" targeting approach in the RA.  And as such, anyone supporting or part of that targeting enterprise (to be really generous) had all be thinking very hard about personal legal exposure and liability. 

This is also a very big reason why the UA has to stay righteous in all this.  Mistakes and accidents happen - in my business we call them "whoopsies".  But blatant or intentional violations of LOAC by UA will end this party in an afternoon.      

Edited January 29, 2023 by The_Capt

[NamEndedAllen]

20 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Ukraine is making a novel claim that cyber attacks being conducted by Russia to inflict pain, suffering, and potentially death upon civilians should be considered a War Crime. 

The USA military at least has already determined what cyber attacks constitute acts of war, and that the LOAC applies in cyber space.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304563104576355623135782718
WASHINGTON – The Pentagon has concluded that computer sabotage coming from another country can constitute an act of war, a finding that for the first time opens the door for the U.S. to respond using traditional military force.

The Pentagon's first formal cyber strategy, unclassified portions of which are expected to become public next month, represents an early attempt to grapple with a changing world in which a hacker could pose as significant a threat to U.S. nuclear reactors, subways or pipelines as a hostile country's military.

In part, the Pentagon intends its plan as a warning to potential adversaries of the consequences of attacking the U.S. in this way. "If you shut down our power grid, maybe we will put a missile down one of your smokestacks," said a military official.    

The Pentagon's document runs about 30 pages in its classified version and 12 pages in the unclassified one. It concludes that the Laws of Armed Conflict—derived from various treaties and customs that, over the years, have come to guide the conduct of war and proportionality of response—apply in cyberspace as in traditional warfare, according to three defense officials who have read the document. 
 

And The Times reported that “[A]ny computer attack that threatens widespread civilian casualties — for example, by cutting off power supplies or bringing down hospitals and emergency-responder networks — could be considered an act of aggression.” 

[MikeyD]

As to Israeli contributions (or lack thereof) to the war effort, let us recall what was found in Russian Forpost-R armed drones shot down over Ukraine last year. Israel has its own domestic reasons to not oppose someone else's war of righteous ethnic nationalism.

[The_Capt]

5 minutes ago, NamEndedAllen said:

The USA military at least has already determined what cyber attacks constitute acts of war, and that the LOAC applies in cyber space.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304563104576355623135782718
WASHINGTON – The Pentagon has concluded that computer sabotage coming from another country can constitute an act of war, a finding that for the first time opens the door for the U.S. to respond using traditional military force.

The Pentagon's first formal cyber strategy, unclassified portions of which are expected to become public next month, represents an early attempt to grapple with a changing world in which a hacker could pose as significant a threat to U.S. nuclear reactors, subways or pipelines as a hostile country's military.

In part, the Pentagon intends its plan as a warning to potential adversaries of the consequences of attacking the U.S. in this way. "If you shut down our power grid, maybe we will put a missile down one of your smokestacks," said a military official.    

The Pentagon's document runs about 30 pages in its classified version and 12 pages in the unclassified one. It concludes that the Laws of Armed Conflict—derived from various treaties and customs that, over the years, have come to guide the conduct of war and proportionality of response—apply in cyberspace as in traditional warfare, according to three defense officials who have read the document. 
 

And The Times reported that “[A]ny computer attack that threatens widespread civilian casualties — for example, by cutting off power supplies or bringing down hospitals and emergency-responder networks — could be considered an act of aggression.” 

A lot of the confusion and kerfuffle around cyber has nothing to do with the fact that is it in a magical elf-land called "cyber".  It has to do with the context of the actor. 

If you are an ISIL cyber operator in some MENA country, hacking the FBI database in a basement, and the US can find you, the gentle knock on your door is going to be Pred strike - we have literally blown HVT off balconies for less.

Finding, Fixing, and Finishing cyber players is challenging but it is all about the context.  A know terror group attacking a hospital server equates to all sorts of boom-boom.  When it comes from a non-state group with known links to a state that rhymes with "Prussia" working out of Belarus, things get a little more complicated.  First off Pred strikes could start WW3, so there is that.  And the level of attribution has to be a lot higher against another nation state...because the rules and all that. 

I think as the battle lines are being drawn for what is starting to look more and more like the next Cold War - although this one feels more like a gunfight in a phonebooth, I think all states are going to have to wrestle where "the line" is and is not.