How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Haiduk]

22 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

I'm sorry is that T-72 crewed by Russian rebels driving inside Russia with EU flag on it?

No, this is Legion Free Russia flag

Here is address of LFR to Russian people, translated with English subs - their flag on background. Looks like their intentions are serious. They "came to elections" to expell Putin. Interesting, many of so-called Russian "liberals" fiercely condemn such methods of struggle with Putin's regime and consider free-Russia units, fighting on Ukrainian side either as traitors or at least as dangerous radicals, which use "prohibitive" and "violent" methods of struugle with regime.   
 

 

Edited March 12 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

Current situation in Belgorod and Kursk oblasts:

Russian border chekpoint Nekhoteyevka (Belgorod oblast), abandoned by Russian border guards.  Damaged and abandoned free-Russia tank under fire (somebody claimed this is a video of year-ago raid, but maybe later we will have more information)

LFR claims they still hold Tyotkino border settlment in Kursk oblast

Some locals in Belgorod oblast shared infromation Su-27 was allegedly shot down near Belgorod and fell down into forest (this is not IL-76 incident, because Ivanovo, where this plane crashed is in 760 km NE from Belgorod). Single video of probably crash site is a large smoke over the forest, but still no confirmation about jet falling

 

[Haiduk]

During Russian Iskander/KN-23 strike on Odesa port on 6th of March six UKR Naval Forces servicemen have died

 

[Haiduk]

20 hours ago, Beleg85 said:

On other side, clip with Ukrainian MIG 29 shot down by own air defence 8th of march resurfaced.

 

Fighter jet pilot major (lt.colonel posthumously) Andrii Tkachenko, 33 y.o. has died. This was MiG-29 of 114th tactical aviation brigade, Ivano-Frankivsk airfield. This can be not only friendly fire, but R-37M long range missile from Su-35

[cesmonkey]

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-preparing-new-weapons-package-ukraine-officials-2024-03-12/
 

Quote

US preparing new weapons package for Ukraine, officials say

By Mike Stone, Idrees Ali and Patricia Zengerle

March 12, 202410:10 AM PDTUpdated 16 min ago

WASHINGTON, March 12 (Reuters) - The United States is preparing a new military aid package for Ukraine that could be worth as much as $400 million, two U.S. officials told Reuters on Tuesday, the first such move in months as additional funds for Kyiv remain blocked by Republican leaders in Congress.

The officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said an announcement was expected later on Tuesday.

One of the officials said that the funding for this package is from credits refunded to the Pentagon for recent purchases and is expected to contain artillery.

 

[Vanir Ausf B]

Apropos the above, the new US weapons package will include ATACMs

The White House is expected to announce as soon as Tuesday that it will send a new package of weapons worth $300 million to Ukraine, and it will include a number of Army Tactical Missile Systems, according to U.S. officials with knowledge of the discussions.

The package will include a number of the Anti-Personnel/Anti-Materiel, or APAM, an older version of the long-range ATACMS, which travels 100 miles and carries warheads containing hundreds of cluster bomblets, according to one of the officials.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/12/white-house-aid-package-ukraine-00146487

[Kinophile]

47 minutes ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

Apropos the above, the new US weapons package will include ATACMs

The White House is expected to announce as soon as Tuesday that it will send a new package of weapons worth $300 million to Ukraine, and it will include a number of Army Tactical Missile Systems, according to U.S. officials with knowledge of the discussions.

The package will include a number of the Anti-Personnel/Anti-Materiel, or APAM, an older version of the long-range ATACMS, which travels 100 miles and carries warheads containing hundreds of cluster bomblets, according to one of the officials.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/12/white-house-aid-package-ukraine-00146487

Announced:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/12/politics/us-announces-weapons-package-ukraine/index.html

Quote

"The supplemental is absolutely vital for our readiness, as well as Ukraine winning this conflict. This doesn’t change that at all. It is a relatively small package to give Ukraine, the minimum of what it needs for a short amount of time.”

 

Edited March 12 by Kinophile

[cesmonkey]

46 minutes ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

Apropos the above, the new US weapons package will include ATACMs

The White House is expected to announce as soon as Tuesday that it will send a new package of weapons worth $300 million to Ukraine, and it will include a number of Army Tactical Missile Systems, according to U.S. officials with knowledge of the discussions.

The package will include a number of the Anti-Personnel/Anti-Materiel, or APAM, an older version of the long-range ATACMS, which travels 100 miles and carries warheads containing hundreds of cluster bomblets, according to one of the officials.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/12/white-house-aid-package-ukraine-00146487

Yes, $300 million out of Jake Sullivan's mouth:

 

[Holien]

Hmmm unless they have a way to get it past the dogs in the manger they could promise anything and it ain't going?

[dan/california]

9 minutes ago, Holien said:

Hmmm unless they have a way to get it past the dogs in the manger they could promise anything and it ain't going?

Biden has somewhere between 2 and five billion in remaining presidential drawdown authority. Think of it as the final reserve of approved aid. Clearly he felt he had to use some of it

Edited March 12 by dan/california

[Eddy]

1 minute ago, dan/california said:

Biden has somewhere between 2 and five billion in remaining presidential drawdown authority. Think of it as the final reserve of approved aid. Clearly he felt he had to use some of it

According to The Guardian/Reuters it's from cost savings in some contracts. 

White House announces $300m stopgap military aid package for Ukraine | US military | The Guardian

[cesmonkey]

The discharge petition for Representative Fitzpatrick's Bipartisan House Bill to strengthen borders and provide aid for Ukraine - among other things - is now listed by the House Clerk and gathering signatures:

https://clerk.house.gov/DischargePetition/2024031210?CongressNum=118

[billbindc]

5 minutes ago, Eddy said:

According to The Guardian/Reuters it's from cost savings in some contracts. 

White House announces $300m stopgap military aid package for Ukraine | US military | The Guardian

Correct. And it has been a risky step to take given the politics of aid in the US House. 

[Eddy]

3 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

The discharge petition for Representative Fitzpatrick's Bipartisan House Bill to strengthen borders and provide aid for Ukraine - among other things - is now listed by the House Clerk and gathering signatures:

https://clerk.house.gov/DischargePetition/2024031210?CongressNum=118

Am I right in thinking that an normal majority (i.e. not 2/3rds) is needed for a discharge petition and all that a discharge petition means is that the Bill goes before congress? And then it needs another normal majority to be passed? Also does the Senate need to vote on it again? 

Just trying to get my head around what the Speaker can do to put the kibosh on it.

[cesmonkey]

1 minute ago, Eddy said:

Am I right in thinking that an normal majority (i.e. not 2/3rds) is needed for a discharge petition and all that a discharge petition means is that the Bill goes before congress? And then it needs another normal majority to be passed? Also does the Senate need to vote on it again? 

Just trying to get my head around what the Speaker can do to put the kibosh on it.

Yes, yes, and yes.

[billbindc]

23 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

Yes, yes, and yes.

In this case, it's less a question of what the Speaker can do to slow it down (he's already doing that) and more a question of the time it takes to get the petition fully filled out.

 

[billbindc]

"Lawmakers are discharging a special rule from House Rules. Process slightly faster than discharging legislation from a standing committee. Only 7 legislative days to pass for discharge, rather than 30 days to discharge a bill."

https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/724415/how-a-little-used-parliamentary-maneuver-could-decide-the-fate-of-ukraine-funding/?unlock=3941GNX9JJY9R4NM

[Kinophile]

 

Novorossiysk in the crosshairs? 

[Haiduk]

This Russian TG claims passengers onboard of crashed IL-76 was not A-50 crew, but a personnel of 117th transport aviation regiment, Orenburg-2 airbase (also uses IL-76). Total count of deaths now reportedly has rised to 16

 

Edited March 12 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

Russian city Volgodonsk on the east of Rostov oblast is under UKR UAV attack now. Sounds of machine-guns are heard. No information yet about results of atatck.

This city is a center of nuclear energy machine-building of Russia - Rostov nuclear power plant and two largest enterprises, producing 70 % of heavy equipment for nuclear energetic. Except this hydro power plant and two thermal power plants. Fat target. 

 

[ASL Veteran]

3 hours ago, Eddy said:

Am I right in thinking that an normal majority (i.e. not 2/3rds) is needed for a discharge petition and all that a discharge petition means is that the Bill goes before congress? And then it needs another normal majority to be passed? Also does the Senate need to vote on it again? 

Just trying to get my head around what the Speaker can do to put the kibosh on it.

Who is sponsoring the discharge petition?  If it's a Democrat I wouldn't put too much into that - it's possible it could go through, but every Republican who pushes this forward is basically torpedoing the speaker's authority and he would then become ineffective at moving future legislation going forward (the Speaker of the House must be able to get his caucus to agree to different things to pass legislation and if his authority is undermined then he would be ineffective).  So that basically means the Republicans would need to find a new Speaker.  I'm not sure how many Republicans want to go through that again just to pass this (as important as this is to some here, the US has a lot of big issues to tackle).  Besides, none of us on this board know what's going on within the Republican caucus - the leadership likely already has a plan / agreement on what to do.

There are a lot of Democrats who will refuse to vote for this as well simply because they don't want to agree to anything that sends money to Israel.  I haven't seen anyone talking / writing about this Discharge Petition and if nobody is talking about it then I doubt it has any legs - but we'll see.  The votes might be there to pass it if the Speaker brings it to the floor, but just because the votes might there for regular order that doesn't mean that a Discharge Petition will succeed.  Even if every Democrat signed it (and not every one will) you would basically have to get enough Republicans to sign on and then look for a new Speaker of the House. 

[cesmonkey]

More details from the Pentagon on today's announcement:
https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3704975/biden-administration-announces-urgent-security-assistance-for-ukraine/
 

Quote

The capabilities in this announcement include:

Stinger anti-aircraft missiles;
Additional ammunition for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS);
155mm artillery rounds, including High Explosive and Dual Purpose Improved Cluster Munitions rounds;
105mm artillery rounds; 
AT-4 anti-armor systems;
Additional rounds of small arms ammunition;
Demolitions munitions for obstacle clearing; and
Spare parts, maintenance, and other ancillary equipment.

https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3704861/senior-defense-officials-hold-a-background-briefing/
 

Quote

So in one instance, with 25 mm ammunition, we, you know, were buying, you know, 120,000-plus rounds. We estimated initially a unit cost of $130 each, but we ended up getting a better price of $93 to help us as we negotiated the contract with the vendor. So that's an example of how you generate savings with good negotiations.

 

[Eddy]

12 minutes ago, ASL Veteran said:

Who is sponsoring the discharge petition?  If it's a Democrat I wouldn't put too much into that - it's possible it could go through, but every Republican who pushes this forward is basically torpedoing the speaker's authority and he would then become ineffective at moving future legislation going forward (the Speaker of the House must be able to get his caucus to agree to different things to pass legislation and if his authority is undermined then he would be ineffective).  So that basically means the Republicans would need to find a new Speaker.  I'm not sure how many Republicans want to go through that again just to pass this (as important as this is to some here, the US has a lot of big issues to tackle).  Besides, none of us on this board know what's going on within the Republican caucus - the leadership likely already has a plan / agreement on what to do.

There are a lot of Democrats who will refuse to vote for this as well simply because they don't want to agree to anything that sends money to Israel.  I haven't seen anyone talking / writing about this Discharge Petition and if nobody is talking about it then I doubt it has any legs - but we'll see.  The votes might be there to pass it if the Speaker brings it to the floor, but just because the votes might there for regular order that doesn't mean that a Discharge Petition will succeed.  Even if every Democrat signed it (and not every one will) you would basically have to get enough Republicans to sign on and then look for a new Speaker of the House. 

Yes, after reading the article @billbindc posted I came to the conclusion that there are an awful lot of moving parts to this, probably too many. Too many other distractions/issues/platforms. This backs this up. Sadly, democracy is a messy business.

Thanks for taking the time to explain.

[Battlefront.com]

7 minutes ago, Eddy said:

Yes, after reading the article @billbindc posted I came to the conclusion that there are an awful lot of moving parts to this, probably too many. Too many other distractions/issues/platforms. This backs this up.

This is why discharge petitions are very rare and even rarer that they pass.  For the most part they are done to express specific ire at the House Speaker for not taking action on something rather than it being a viable means of bypassing the Speaker.

7 minutes ago, Eddy said:

Sadly, democracy is a messy business.

One person having the power to decide what gets voted on and when is not democracy in action.  I have a lot of boardroom experience (small, local stuff) and in almost 30 years of serving on boards I have never once, not even once, had the Chair/President refuse to hold a vote.  I've even seen times when someone has a really dumb idea, insists on it being voted on, someone who is opposed to it "seconds" to get it to proceed to a vote, then it gets voted down.  That is how real democratic principles work, not the crap that both House and Senate leadership routinely demonstrates by both parties in power.  It irritates me.

Steve

[Eddy]

2 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

This is why discharge petitions are very rare and even rarer that they pass.  For the most part they are done to express specific ire at the House Speaker for not taking action on something rather than it being a viable means of bypassing the Speaker.

Steve

Yep, I kind of equated it to a private members bill in the UK. More a way of highlighting something than actually getting a bill through. Not exactly the same but hopefully you get my gist.

The problem, I'm guessing, is that even though it expresses ire with the current speaker there is not a lot that can change given the divisions the ousting of the previous speaker exposed. Well, on top of the other problems like linking it to the border, Gaza etc.

This isn't going to happen, is it?