According to Wikipedia:

quote:

There were news reports of the Admiral Makarov on fire in the Black Sea on 6 May. The Ukrainian military also said that the Makarov had been struck by a Ukrainian Neptune missile. Dumskaya, a Ukrainian-state news site, said Russian forces had sent helicopters to rescue the crew of the ship. Data from Flightradar24 showed a USAF Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk and an RAF Boeing RC-135 Rivet Joint flying in circular patterns over the Black Sea, suggesting that something may have happened to the Makarov.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...gate_Admiral_Makarov

Too bad, so sad. . .

Revell is going to have a great year!

Unless his health fails, or someone whacks him, I think Putin's use of tactical nuclear weaponry is almost a certainty at this point.

The Russian state-run media has been ramping up their rhetoric about tactical nukes lately, about how there will be no lasting environmental/global repercussions from a tactical nuke, that Russia's missile defense system can shoot down any retaliatory strikes so there's zero risk to the Russian people, etc.

That isn't a comforting sign. It points to the government trying to lay a foundation of public reassurance in preparation for a future nuke strike.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
It points to the government trying to lay a foundation of public reassurance in preparation for a future nuke strike.

It reminds me of Göring’s saying “You can call Meyer” if a single enemy bomber reached the Ruhr. I.e., “It’s okay for us to bomb them because they will never bomb us.”

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sigfreund,

The NYT is reporting that US intelligence helped Ukraine kill Russian generals. Every leak like this--if that's what it is--increases the risk of our being hit by a Russian nuke.
Loose lips sink cities.

quote:

hip. Data from Flightradar24 showed a USAF Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk and an RAF Boeing RC-135 Rivet Joint flying in circular patterns over the Black Sea, suggesting that something may have happened to the Makarov.

Had this 'article' done any research and provided some perspective....NATO/US ISR assets of all varieties have been airborne for this entire conflict, flying patterns along the border areas, Hoovering-up data, its what they do. So, not really news but, trying to make a connection because something is there, and this 'thing' happened, therefore they must be related.

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
The NYT is reporting that US intelligence helped Ukraine kill Russian generals. Every leak like this--if that's what it is--increases the risk of our being hit by a Russian nuke.
Loose lips sink cities.

This isn't a "leak". It's personal self-aggrandizement by the narcissistic, resume puffing, semi-simian, fuckopithecus, time keeping, oxygen thieves who occupy the highest levels of our government. They are telling reporters this shit in search of their next job, with no thought whatsoever to the OPSEC, diplomatic or national security implications of the information. For the love of all that is holy, shut-the-fuck-up you mouth breathing moron!

Unauthorized disclosure of this information should result at a minimum, in jail time, and at a maximum, in execution.

quote:

Originally posted by ArtieS:
execution.

Yes, it would be nice to have one on occasion “pour encourager les autres.”

quote:

Originally posted by ArtieS:
They are telling reporters this shit in search of their next job, with no thought whatsoever to the OPSEC, diplomatic or national security implications of the information. For the love of all that is holy, shut-the-fuck-up you mouth breathing moron!

Unauthorized disclosure of this information should result at a minimum, in jail time, and at a maximum, in execution.

More evidence that these idiots, have zero intention of finding a peaceful resolution let alone, working to find a cease fire to hostilities. You can see the Russian's frustration, on one hand you're telling us to stop fight as if you're a moral arbiter but, in the press you're happily patting yourselves on the back with how you've 'assisted' our enemy.

In the back of my mind, I'm grinning, seeing all the Russian bully-persona getting up-ended but, if your job is in national security or, diplomacy...WTF are you doing by making such thing public?!?

Tucker says the leftists in America have already drawn us into war with Russia, and think he's right. Plenty of politicians have adopted this as a war 'we' need to win.

quote:

Originally posted by sse:
Tucker says the leftists in America have already drawn us into war with Russia, and think he's right. Plenty of politicians have adopted this as a war 'we' need to win.

The left need this proxy war because it is/was their cash-cow for money laundering and enriching their spawn. The minions on the left who support this are just the "useful idiots".

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
The Russian state-run media has been ramping up their rhetoric about tactical nukes lately, about how there will be no lasting environmental/global repercussions from a tactical nuke, that Russia's missile defense system can shoot down any retaliatory strikes so there's zero risk to the Russian people, etc.

That isn't a comforting sign. It points to the government trying to lay a foundation of public reassurance in preparation for a future nuke strike.

Perhaps, but it points just as much to a bluff. The only way Putin believes that retaliatory strikes can be blocked or will have some kind of limited impact is if he's listening to the same people who told him Ukraine would be a cake walk. Russia has made several vaguely worded threats about using vaguely described weapons to retaliate if vaguely defined red lines were crossed - and hasn't done anything of the kind yet. This is, in its own way, just another vague threat as far as anyone can tell.

Both Russia and the various countries opposed to the invasion of Ukraine have made a number of gestures recently (158,000 draftees to be called up in Russia, astronomical allocations in American training and aid to Ukraine, etc.) to signal that they were committed to a fight to the end. There's no particular reason to believe that this isn't one of those gestures.

quote:

Originally posted by sse:
Unless his health fails, or someone whacks him, I think Putin's use of tactical nuclear weaponry is almost a certainty at this point.

What POSSIBLE use would a nuke be? They can't occupy a town they nuked. This would provoke international outrage and make Russia an international parriah. Putin is saber-rattling. As Tom Clancy wrote, 'a rattling saber is noisy; a drawn saber is silent.'

I keep hearing Putin will resort to tactical nukes if he can't win conventionally. But how would that help him? What Ukrainian military capability or advantage would be totally wiped out by a tactical nuke that conventional weapons can't reach? If Putin has any iota of rational though left, he's has to know he'd become more isolated than N. Korea by using one or more nukes. So it'd have to be a war-ending thing to even be close to worth the consequences.

Edit: Hound Dog beat me to it.

It would be possible for Russia to use tactical nukes in Western Ukraine to close off supply lines from Poland and its neighbours. Strikes on crossroads, rail hubs, warehouse complexes etc would seriously impact the movement of supplies needed to fight the war. They just can't seem to make it happen with their conventional cruise missiles.
Hitting Western Ukraine runs the risk of affecting NATO countries with fallout, but it is pretty unlikely that NATO would strike back in kind.
Yes Putin and Russia would be shunned internationally, but Europe is still very much dependent on their oil and gas and it will be several years at least before they stop buying it. China will likely always continue. Putin may see this as an acceptable option.
I too think it is highly unlikely, but I also thought an all out invasion of all of Ukraine was unthinkable and unnecessary.

The Russian Navy is quickly becoming the equivalent of the Spanish Armada; best seen from glass-bottomed boats.

Again?

quote:

Originally posted by TSE:
but I also thought an all out invasion of all of Ukraine was unthinkable and unnecessary.

Yes.

Putin doesn't want to lose. It depends on how desperate or imbalanced he is, and whether he wants to win at all costs.

quote:

Originally posted by sse:

quote:

Originally posted by TSE:
but I also thought an all out invasion of all of Ukraine was unthinkable and unnecessary.

Yes.

Putin doesn't want to lose. It depends on how desperate or imbalanced he is, and whether he wants to win at all costs.

In my opinion he has been isolated from reality by his advisors. I am certain nobody warned him against a large scale invasion because his army was a paper tiger. What his version of reality is right now is impossible to say. That is without considering any mental or physical issues.