Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 1001 posts

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#651

Post by air3y »

numeric83 wrote: post #628
nbman102 wrote: post #619

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this wasn't an accident, given the recent Biden escalation that allows ATACMS strikes in Kursk in could mean two things: 1) Russia hastily retaliated, which is out of character. You can accuse Russia of many things, but not of retaliating instantly (against the West, in Ukraine they probably do). 2) False flag in order to drum up pro-war sentiment in the West. If Biden escalates in the last weeks of his presidency…

"Escalate"? Allowing Ukraine to use the weapons it has to strike back at an aggressor in order to mitigate or reduce said aggressors ability to continue attacking is ... "escalation"? I don't think so. If anything artificial limits have been placed on Ukraine that are not placed on other nations (or in some cases proscribed terrorist organisations) purchasing or being "gifted" weapons. Whether those weapons are from…

Yes. Weapons hitting places deep inside Russia that haven't been hit before is escalation. Whether one favors the act or not isn't how a step is considered as escalation. Now the Russians might or might not take steps that the other side considers escalation.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#652

Post by rad_gruchalski »

burningChrome wrote: post #373
aguaviva wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because he needed all that time (2014-2022) to build up his forces and cash reserves. Also, he needed a green light. Which was provided in the form of the chaotic Afghanistan pullout in 2021. Not that he was counting on it -- but once it went through, it seems very likely that tipped the scales in his mind in favor of deciding to actually go through with the full-scale invasion in 2022.

Its also been widely reported that when Trump first met Putin he said if he invaded Ukraine, he would turn Moscow and several other cities into a parking lot. Trump in several interviews has said he warned Putin not to do it, that he would pay a very, very heavy cost and he would see to it that he would. This is all Trump had to do. He was able to leverage the media's reporting on him that he was reckless, dangerous…

> Its also been widely reported that when Trump first met Putin he said if he invaded Ukraine, he would turn Moscow and several other cities into a parking lot.

Yeah. Trump talks a lot. Like his best friend, Melon.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#653

Post by KptMarchewa »

trhway wrote: post #647
KptMarchewa wrote: post #639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is vast difference between just driving somewhere and actually controlling it. Russia learned that in first month of the invasion. If they weren't stopped at Voznesensk, they would be stopped somewhere else - there was singular BTG driving somewhere deep into hostile territory. Another example of BTG driving deep and getting decimated: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4g68MmLrGvM

>There is vast difference between just driving somewhere and actually controlling it. Russia learned that in first month of the invasion. I made such comment here in the first hours of the invasion :) >If they weren't stopped at Voznesensk, they would be stopped somewhere else if they were able to take the bridge at Voznesensk, that BTG would keep it, and more forces would come that way.

I don't believe they'd be able to keep and reinforce it, given that they were only able to bypass Mykolaiv due to the early day chaos. And Mykolaiv was giving rest of russian forces there enough problems.

However, at this point it's only speculation, probably not worth getting deeper into it.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#654

Post by alenrozac »

amelius wrote: post #644
MasterYoda wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last time it happened, the Russian ship had also been seen unnaturally going back and forth over the cable where the damage occurred. These damages do not happen by themselves. Considering the current international situation and the fact that it happened in a short time in several places unnaturally in a limited region, the Baltic Sea, you have to be very naive if you do not see this as probable sabotage.

Do we have some kind of time-of-flight system that can find out exactly where a cable damage occurred, the instant that it occurs?

There's repeaters so the general area should be known.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#655

Post by trollied »

amelius wrote: post #644
MasterYoda wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last time it happened, the Russian ship had also been seen unnaturally going back and forth over the cable where the damage occurred. These damages do not happen by themselves. Considering the current international situation and the fact that it happened in a short time in several places unnaturally in a limited region, the Baltic Sea, you have to be very naive if you do not see this as probable sabotage.

Do we have some kind of time-of-flight system that can find out exactly where a cable damage occurred, the instant that it occurs?

This: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread-spectrum_time-domain_re...

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#656

Post by coretx »

sedan_baklazhan wrote: post #526
gspr wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So blowing up North Stream was fun, but this somewhy isn’t. I’m very often puzzled by the logic and morale in the West. North Stream was blown up by the desperate defender in a war of aggression. These undersea cables were (likely) severed by the aggressor in the same war. Are you less puzzled now?

All media coverage after Nord Stream was blown did say that Russia did it (just because it's evil, no real reasoning was presented). So, was it really Russia that destroyed German infrastructure? Or was it someone else?

North Stream was a existential threat to the EU, especially the Baltic states and Poland have no interest in being sandwiched between Russia and Germany again. Many German politicians are directly or indirectly bought by Russia, the most notable example being: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schr%C3%B6der As Germany was so stupid to close down their nuclear installations and coal mines at more or less at the same time without investing in enough backbone and LNG installations; rising parties such as the AFD would rather side with Russia and get cheap gas instead of helping Ukraine and the rest of Europe. This is why more or less everyone could have done it. I would have done it myself if i was living in eastern Europe. Matter of survival.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#657

Post by numeric83 »

air3y wrote: post #651
numeric83 wrote: post #628

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Escalate"? Allowing Ukraine to use the weapons it has to strike back at an aggressor in order to mitigate or reduce said aggressors ability to continue attacking is ... "escalation"? I don't think so. If anything artificial limits have been placed on Ukraine that are not placed on other nations (or in some cases proscribed terrorist organisations) purchasing or being "gifted" weapons. Whether those weapons are from…

Yes. Weapons hitting places deep inside Russia that haven't been hit before is escalation. Whether one favors the act or not isn't how a step is considered as escalation. Now the Russians might or might not take steps that the other side considers escalation.

Ukraine has been hitting targets "deep" inside Russia for a long time now - further than ATACMS or the export Storm Shadow/SCALP-EG can reach. Whether Ukraine use their own weapons or those purchased/gifted from others seems irrelevant. This is Russia saying "we can hit you with weapons provided by other nations, but you cannot be allowed to hit us likewise" - it's pathetic.

As for what Russia may do, they've been told publicly and privately by multiple nations: from the U.S., UK, and France, even China and India to wind their necks in with regard any nuclear escalation. However, they are very adept at asymmetric responses, and Putin has already said he would consider arming groups with anti-"western" sympathies - he probably already has.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#658

Post by matthewdgreen »

blub wrote: post #494
looperhacks wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our governing coalition just split and there will be early elections (most likely) in February. Nobody has a majority right now, any anmouncement is currently unlikely. In fact our lovely head of the Government just reaffirmed that we won't send taurus to the ukraine.

These long-range missiles are a short-time tactic designed to merely hurt the Russians or prevent them from doing certain actions under threat of pain and not a real strategy. Ukraine hasn’t had any battlefield successes since the Kursk Hail Mary which failed early and is now only maintained with the hope of improving their negotiating position when the time comes. The approval of long-range strikes by the US & co li…

Increasing armament manufacturing capacity is critical for Germany and European self-defense regardless of whether those shells go to Ukraine or just get stockpiled. Does anyone seriously think that Europe is going to avoid future warfare in a world where Russia achieves its military goals in this conflict? It's madness.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#660

Post by Cthulhu_ »

belter wrote: post #579
staplung wrote: post #63

It's worth mentioning that cable breakages happen quite often; globally about 200 times per year [1] and the article itself mentions that just last year, two other cables and a gas pipeline were taken out by an anchor. The Gulf of Finland is evidently quite shallow. From what I understand, cable repair ships are likely to use ROVs for parts of repair jobs but only when the water is shallow so hopefully they can figur…

"Germany’s defense minister says damage to 2 Baltic data cables appears to be sabotage" - https://apnews.com/article/germany-finland-baltic-data-cable...

English isn't my first language, but isn't "appears to be" inconclusive? It is or it isn't, "appears to be" is still too vague for my liking.
Post reply on HN