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

731–740 of 1001 posts

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#731

Post by rurp »

oneshtein wrote: post #708
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #704

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They might occupy some area, sure, but if they invade a EU or NATO country they'll get that full force on top of them. And they have a lot of aircraft to deploy too; tanks have zero chance against an airstrike.

NATO cannot stop Russia in Ukraine, even with help of 1 million Ukrainian army. NATO have no enough tanks, shells, soldiers to stop 2 million army in few first weeks, even if Russians will just march with their AK-s in hands. The only thing that will stop Russia for sure is a nuclear strike. Planes are good for strikes, but ground must be captured and hold by soldiers.

Eh, western militaries are holding a lot of weaponry back from Ukraine; like the vast majority of it. They have run low in a few areas that have been key in this war, like artillery shells, but that's in part because these countries haven't prioritized that production in recent history in favor of other systems.

I actually do think that the US and Europe should be moving faster to increase their military manufacturing capacity, especially Europe given the situation they are now facing. But to say that NATO countries have been throwing everything they have to Ukraine is wildly off the mark.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#732

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

euroderf wrote: post #73

So what's the solution ? Assign a surveillance UAV to every Russian ship parked "without a good reason" over a cable ? It would be expensive, but doable, and create a reserve of vehicles for wartime use.

Treat it as the act of war that it is, and confiscate or sink the ship involved in it. If it can be done before it reaches a harbor, of course also arrest the crew.

If it happens repeatedly, declare the passage of all Russian ships (or possibly starting with ships of the type involved in the incident, allowing other shipping and giving Russia a chance to stop abusing it) "prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State" and deny passage through territorial waters. Extend the territorial waters between Finland and Estonia to the full 12 miles without the current corridor in between.

Russia understands and responds to strength better than to diplomacy and appeasement.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#733

Post by brohee »

CapricornNoble wrote: post #186
petre wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Best course of action at this time would be to properly arm Ukraine.

What exactly would "properly" arming Ukraine look like? The entire Western world doesn't produce enough Patriot missiles to meet Ukraine's air defense needs, just as one critical example. We are aiming for a global production target of 750 missiles/year ( https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/15354795 ).... Russia has fired about 6,000 missiles and large drones per year ( https://kyivindependent.com/defense-ministry-ove…

The large drones (if you mean Shahed by that) absolutely don't need a Patriot response. More Gepards would help with those OTOH.

The West could definitely manufacture enough counter to the ballistic missile menace.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#734

Post by cmrdporcupine »

lesuorac wrote: post #682
lolinder wrote: post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can also mean that Russia is posturing and retaliating for the US's announcement that Ukraine can strike inside Russia with US missiles. This feels more like the same kind of exercise that North Korea does with their missile tests than it does an actual invasion.

I never really liked the whole sabotage is just "posturing" opinion. Like there's real physical stuff destroyed (or in most circumstances digital stuff). How hard is it to impound ships that break stuff and etc so that the ones responsible are actually punished?

Probably no harder than impounding illegal unsafe unregistered oil shipping transports making their way through the Baltic->Black sea right now, evading sanctions.

Not hard. Not done. Because we're cowards.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#735

Post by cmrdporcupine »

trhway wrote: post #572
nkrisc wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would be more concerning if Russia had any tanks left. Are you suggesting Russia has a full invasion force they’re not using in Ukraine? Or to liberate their own occupied territory?

Baltic states have 30K military total combined - Russia loses 20-30K/month in Ukraine. So, with all the respect to the Baltic states military - with them being responsible for the defense of about 700km long strip of land, it isn't about full invasion force, it is about having NATO not responding long enough.

I can't imagine a scenario where the Baltics are invaded without Poland getting involved. And maybe even Germany, Sweden, Finland.

And that is not a fight I think Russia can win and they know that.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#736

Post by aguaviva »

valval wrote: post #604
aguaviva wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know what I said, and I was careful with my words. Except your number is way off, and has no connection to reality.

Well, the number of wars and conflicts that the US, UK, France, Germany, or Italy (de facto NATO) have been part of unnecessarily since 1949 is above 12 (a dozen), but then again dozen isn't a rigorous quantifier, and I was careful not to use a precise number since I knew it was somewhere between 10 and 15 but couldn't be bothered counting for my message.

No, every conflict the US has been involved in is not "de facto NATO".

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#737

Post by ikiris »

red_admiral wrote: post #510
ValentinA23 wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 1 in 36 million chance for three breaks in one day. https://mathb.in/80217

One a day is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.

Or they’re right next to each other and the laws of physics continued to exist for the object that struck them.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#738

Post by [deleted] »

esarbe wrote: post #665
calmoo wrote: post #661

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is some pretty compelling evidence that it was Ukraine. The CIA even tipped Germany off about the potential saboteurs https://archive.is/dPdoX

What exactly is the evidence there? I read the article and all I see is hearsay. German investigations found that the Andromeda trail leads to Russia[0]. [0] https://www.tagesspiegel.de/internationales/nord-stream-spur...

[deleted]

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#739

Post by aguaviva »

IncreasePosts wrote: post #720
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.

Doubtful. He needed another 8 years after an annexing Crimea to build up the Russian army? Why would he need cash reserves if he has a toadie in the white house? Imagine how quickly ukriane would have collapsed if the US was not providing support, and the US was preventing European nations from providing support. And then imagine how well off Russia would be if there were no sanctions placed on it by America. All in…

Why would he need cash reserves if he has a toadie in the white house?

You may want to think about the chronology again.

And then ask yourself if your statement above still makes sense.

Re: Two undersea cables in Baltic Sea disrupted

#740

Post by timeon »

alecco wrote: post #529
tenuousemphasis wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely you should be able to provide a source for the claim that Trump threatened Putin over Ukraine.

Not op. But in 2018 Trump did scold live on camera the German leaders for buying gas from Russia. "Germany is completely controlled by Russia". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JpwkeTBwgs NOTE: I mostly don't like Trump. But the "Russiagate" angle is ridiculous.

This is moving the goalpost a bit.
Post reply on HN