News Forum - Ukraine’s Zelensky defies Russia’s ultimatum to lay down weapons

[birdman]

39 minutes ago, Fester said:

Different type of mine completely. Fly away Peter (or Paul).

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/non-human-troops-amp-spies-birds-and-animals-deployed-for-military-missions/a-beluga-russian-spy/slideshow/69183627.cms

Here you go Mary.

[Fanta]

1 minute ago, EdwardV said:

Seems Ukraine isn’t the only one sacking generals

These guys must have breathed a sigh of relief at not being sent to the Ukrainian front because that’s a death sentence for Russian generals.

[birdman]

41 minutes ago, Marble-eye said:

Are you spreading disinformation on porpoise?

What disinformation?

[Fester]

26 minutes ago, Chatogaster said:

When I read your comment, my first impression was surprise: if they can be trained to detect explosives, training them to plant explosives is the obvious next (or previous) step. Surely they can (and have been used to) do both?

My first attempt (the only one needed) was opening the link you re-used to suggest that IneptoCracy didn't read it, by claiming it contains a proof that dolphins cannot be trained to lay explosives. It contains the sentence "Baranets says Soviet combat dolphins were trained to plant explosives on enemy vessels and could detect abandoned torpedoes and sunken ships in the Black Sea.".

I wouldn't call that proof that dolphins can do both (after all, it's just one source in which somebody says something), but it is proof that your disproof is incorrect. 

If you're serious about (dis)proving something, have the decency to be a bit more thorough and at the very least fully read your referenced source(s). Attempts like this (yours is not unique, sigh...) are pitiful.
 

Fanta first introduced the subject of mines (and particularly mine clearance). Mine clearance is a term commonly associated with naval mines - which can weigh more than a ton and so be rather difficult for even Flipper to manage on his own - usually located, collected and dealt with by minesweepers/minehunters.

Dolphins have been used to locate naval mines and other hazards. They can also be trained to place small magnetic (limpet) mines on the hulls of ships but these attach well and rarely break free and drift around on the tides currents like the big ones do. Explosives in the sea are not necessarily mines. 

 

[Fester]

25 minutes ago, birdman said:

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/non-human-troops-amp-spies-birds-and-animals-deployed-for-military-missions/a-beluga-russian-spy/slideshow/69183627.cms

Here you go Mary.

No mention of 1000kg mines being cleared in there. But Haw Haw loved it of course.

[IneptoCracy]

OK those that have not served, a little home truth here. Dolphins are excellent at planting mines on ship hulls and have been used to plant Limpit mines onto the hulls of ships. Have a good look at a Russian limpet mine please before answering and note that the pad is one big magnet or eight smaller magnets...

https://cat-uxo.com/explosive-hazards/landmines/upm-limpet-Bakelitemine

These were placed into bakelite cups on the dolphin's back, they would swim under a ship and arch their back. How do I know, I served in IED/EOD.

[Fanta]

6 minutes ago, Fester said:

Fanta first introduced the subject of mines (and particularly mine clearance)

Wrong. The discussion was about who deployed the sea mines, not their removal. 

[Fester]

6 minutes ago, Fanta said:

Wrong. The discussion was about who deployed the sea mines, not their removal. 

Your post 209998 is served. Enjoy.

The UN dude was saying the he intends to get sales of Russian and Ukrainian agricultural products back on track so I doubt that Black Sea will be the scene of a naval battle. Clear out all those mines (that Ukraine absolutely positively didn’t lay there 555) out of the ports, give Russia a few megayachts or similar back and the foodstuffs will flow. 

[Chatogaster]

24 minutes ago, Fester said:

Fanta first introduced the subject of mines (and particularly mine clearance). Mine clearance is a term commonly associated with naval mines - which can weigh more than a ton and so be rather difficult for even Flipper to manage on his own - usually located, collected and dealt with by minesweepers/minehunters.

Dolphins have been used to locate naval mines and other hazards. They can also be trained to place small magnetic (limpet) mines on the hulls of ships but these attach well and rarely break free and drift around on the tides currents like the big ones do. Explosives in the sea are not necessarily mines. 

 

You're missing the point (it's a bit meta so I don't blame you).

It's not about dolphins, nationalities, explosives (in all their variations) etc., but about how the "truth" can be determined, especially the validity of logical chains.

I showed in my post that you tried to disprove a claim by providing a single reference that not only doesn't support the anti-claim, it even supports the claim.

That's not the way to go.
 

 

Edited May 19 by Chatogaster
anti-claim <--> claim

[Fanta]

Finland and Sweden’s Prime Ministers have both said that permanent NATO bases and nukes on their territories are not welcome.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/19/finland-against-hosting-nuclear-weapons-nato-military-bases-pm

That might explain why Putin chilled on his “NATO= nuke for you!” stance. As well as the realization that threats with nukes are seen as an empty threat, especially when you have never fired one in anger. Kim Dim Sim should take note - hopefully Covid will take out that bulbous, blustering buffoon.

[Fanta]

14 minutes ago, Fester said:

Your post 209998 is served. Enjoy.

And you choose to ignore the 10 following posts discussing the subject of who laid the sea mines including the post you actually replied to. Picking one sentence out of 50 in an attempt to save face is an insult to anyone that can follow a conversation. I should never have replied to you as it always goes like this -  a waste of time as you attempt to prove an irrelevant point.

[Fester]

9 minutes ago, Fanta said:

And you choose to ignore the 10 following posts discussing the subject of who laid the sea mines including the post you actually replied to. Picking one sentence out of 50 in an attempt to save face is an insult to anyone that can follow a conversation. I should never have replied to you as it always goes like this -  a waste of time as you attempt to prove an irrelevant point.

So you acknowledge that you said sea mines, well that's a start and entirely relevant. It always goes like this because you spout off not knowing anything about a topic and then find yourself scrambling for a way out in vain attempts to save your own face.

[Fester]

29 minutes ago, Chatogaster said:

You're missing the point (it's a bit meta so I don't blame you).

It's not about dolphins, nationalities, explosives (in all their variations) etc., but about how the "truth" can be determined, especially the validity of logical chains.

I showed in my post that you tried to disprove a claim by providing a single reference that not only doesn't support the anti-claim, it even supports the claim.

That's not the way to go.
 

I might be missing your point, that's for sure. What was it again?

[EdwardV]

33 minutes ago, Fanta said:

Finland and Sweden’s Prime Ministers have both said that permanent NATO bases and nukes on their territories are not welcome.

Well to be fair, that’s the case with all the new members since the fall of the USSR. None of them have permanent bases and of course no nukes. 

The Baltic states have been begging for permanent basing for years. Two months ago, Poland asked for a permanent base and even asked for the US to station nukes. It’s highly doubtful they get nukes, it requires so much more than just a permanent base. Biden isn’t going to go for that. Still it’s almost a done deal they will get a permanent base but only with a rotating troop deployment (to be fair a distinction without a difference). 
 

Ironically Poland wouldn’t be getting even that had not been for Putin invading Ukraine. 

[Alavan]

14 hours ago, Fanta said:

Why would Russia lay the mines if Ukraine had no ships?

Economic blockade?

[EdwardV]

1 hour ago, Alavan said:

Economic blockade?

That's what I say too. I get there is some logic to the idea Ukraine might have placed the mines, it's a low cost defense against a Russian landing. However you have to lay a lot of mines over a very large area for it to be effective. In the process they destroy their economy. Doesn't make sense in the bigger picture. Never mind they don't have the ships to lay mines after day one. Keep in mind it was Russia who sent out the naval warning of mines after the start of the war. Just them being a nice guy maybe? However it also tells all ships to stay away from Ukraine too. Makes a blockage so much easier. It's also interesting Russia didn't seem to have much problem sailing around Ukraine waters. They spent a lot of time shelling the coastal area early in the war. Almost makes you think they weren't afraid of running into a mine, like they almost knew where they were all located. That is until Ukraine decided they liked turning Russian surface ships into submarines. 

[Fanta]

1 hour ago, Alavan said:

Economic blockade?

The Russian warships are already blockading the ports. Why bother with mines? 

[Rookiescot]

9 minutes ago, Fanta said:

The Russian warships are already blockading the ports. Why bother with mines? 

Because the Russian navy does not want to be patrolling close to the coast because they have mysterious fires occasionally. 

BTW have you now accepted the Moscow was sunk or are you still claiming it was simply a case of poor source of ignition control?

[EdwardV]

15 hours ago, Fanta said:

In other news: 
“Russia on Wednesday said it was using a new generation of powerful lasers in Ukraine to burn up drones, deploying some of Moscow's secret weapons to counter a flood of Western arms.”

Zelenskky, as usual didn’t have a good thing to say about the Russians and called the lasers wonder weapons.

 

However, an official with the US Department of Defense said he had not seen "anything to corroborate reports of lasers being used" in Ukraine. Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky mocked the Russian claim, comparing it to the so-called "wonder weapons" that Nazi Germany claimed to be developing during World War Two. "The clearer it became that they had no chance in the war, the more propaganda there was about an amazing weapon that would be so powerful as to ensure a turning point," he said in a video address. "And so we see that in the third month of a full-scale war, Russia is trying to find its 'wonder weapon'... this all clearly shows the complete failure of the mission."

 

But missile defence expert Dr Uzi Rubin from the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS) said laser weapon technology would not alter the balance of power on the battlefield in Ukraine. "Zelensky is right - it's no wonder weapon," he told the BBC. "It took them several seconds to shoot the UAV down. There are much better ways to do it, to use a Stinger or any anti-aircraft missile would have been cheaper, faster and longer range." Lasers work by sending out a beam of infrared light that heats up its target until it combusts. Dr Rubin said the power of even advanced laser weapons was still too weak to make a significant difference on the battlefield, and such weapons had a low "kill rate". "It's not like in Star Wars where they point a laser gun at the bad guys and quickly push a button and the bad guy explodes. In reality, it's more like a mere microwave oven. If you want to make a cup of water boil it takes some time. The laser is the same. You need to put it on the target and wait until it heats up and destroys it," he said.

Russia's laser weapon claim derided as propaganda (msn.com)

 

 

 

[IneptoCracy]

Here is a wonderful tweet picture from the Ukrainian side of things. Somebody must have ordered the regulars to transport the thing very gently, so they put it into an ambulance...

Edited May 19 by IneptoCracy

[Alavan]

1 hour ago, Fanta said:

The Russian warships are already blockading the ports. Why bother with mines? 

it is a lot cheaper

[Alavan]

1 hour ago, EdwardV said:

That's what I say too. I get there is some logic to the idea Ukraine might have placed the mines, it's a low cost defense against a Russian landing. However you have to lay a lot of mines over a very large area for it to be effective. In the process they destroy their economy. Doesn't make sense in the bigger picture. Never mind they don't have the ships to lay mines after day one. Keep in mind it was Russia who sent out the naval warning of mines after the start of the war. Just them being a nice guy maybe? However it also tells all ships to stay away from Ukraine too. Makes a blockage so much easier. It's also interesting Russia didn't seem to have much problem sailing around Ukraine waters. They spent a lot of time shelling the coastal area early in the war. Almost makes you think they weren't afraid of running into a mine, like they almost knew where they were all located. That is until Ukraine decided they liked turning Russian surface ships into submarines. 

Sailing in the second half of the sixties and even into the seventies we had to follow minesweeped routes along the Dutch, and German coasts and in the Baltic.
There even was a book on board we had to consult. Just google NEMEDRI.

[vlad]

6 hours ago, birdman said:

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/non-human-troops-amp-spies-birds-and-animals-deployed-for-military-missions/a-beluga-russian-spy/slideshow/69183627.cms

Here you go Mary.

This thread is about Zelenski ignoring an ultimatum to lay down arms, not Flipper laying mines.

[vlad]

Strange how Haw-Haw never replies to Questions he would rather ignore like War crime trials or who are the good guys or the bad guys Mmm.

[Fanta]

6 hours ago, Alavan said:

it is a lot cheaper

I thought I posted this yesterday but it disappeared. Maybe because I didn’t write anything.