weapon inflection...

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Wed, 2 Mar 2022 17:44:44 -0800 (PST)) it happened Rick C
<gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
<a01ba1c5-462d-4143-8b2c-920b3c24a720n@googlegroups.com>:

On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 4:28:17 PM UTC-5, Carlos E.R. wrote:
You are mistaken. I\'m watching TV, over the air, everyday; and right now
I\'m listening to the radio. Actual radio. And in my country, internet
coverage is very good. For instance, I have 300 Mbit fibre, because I
refused to have 1 gigabit.

Yes, you define the world. Thank you for your input.

Rick you are wrong
I have several FM radio stations to chose from here in the Netherlands.
All from towers.
Cellphone all from towers.
The cable provider has at its main station satellite dishes for other country programs,
but when power fails nobody has any reception, those and all those cable amplifiers are dead.
The terrestrial DVB TV is from towers.

Anyways, shortly after posting here, Russian RT English speaking channels on satellite went black with only a test tone
on the normal resolution channel, the HD channel lasted a few minutes longer..
www.rt.com worked this morning via internet (4G also from a local tower).
Those towers are interconnected with links via dishes and fiber when one tower goes no telling if the rest has anything.

What remains in bad times is short-wave radio, I have a nice Tecsun PL600 AM FM SSB radio on batteries.
And of course CB (27 MHz) for anybody, who has one and as I have a ham license my other high power transmitters.
I will look up Russia English on shortwave radio later today, wonder is US puppet slaves here will jam it.
China is all over shortwave, BBC was on long wave,,, have not tried it lately.

And my sat dish, the problem is Russia uses the geostationary Astra 2 satellites.
Would not be hard for them to put their own broadcast satellite in or near that same spot,
then EU could not have (force) the Astra club to cut their transmissions.
Then you may get into a satellite shoot out,,,
Fiber is not worth a thing in a war situation with power failures.
I have a solar panel and 250 Ah lifepo4 here to keep stuff running.

Interesting Russia Russian speaking channel on Hotbird satellite was still working last night.
Not sure who controls Hotbird, upload station is in Spain IIRC.
Need to improve my Russian,

Strange how when the Iraq invasion happened by US and NATO I could see Iraq being destroyed on Iraq TV here
via satellite.
All those sanctions on Russia seem a bit preposterous to me
How about doing it to the US?

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Wed, 2 Mar 2022 13:15:18 -0800 (PST)) it happened whit3rd
<whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in
<e846853a-e283-4896-b964-023d7cecc763n@googlegroups.com>:

On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 8:25:00 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

Warfare could become our robots fighting their robots.

It\'s not clear that smart-but-disposable is the winning combination; a
well-instrumented artillery battery can account for a lot of mobile armor,
without requiring the metal tonnage and fuel supply. Ukraine\'s best defense
might be their non-intercontinental ballistic weaponry. It\'s not high tech, and it
is completely affordable. It also isn\'t offensive to distant cities in other nations.

Hard to tell if an incoming missile is not nuclear
A nervous Russia could answer with a nuclear counterstrike before it even hits.
As Ukrain has indicated it wants to go nuclear.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 03/03/22 08:26, Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Wed, 2 Mar 2022 13:15:18 -0800 (PST)) it happened whit3rd
whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in
e846853a-e283-4896-b964-023d7cecc763n@googlegroups.com>:

On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 8:25:00 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

Warfare could become our robots fighting their robots.

It\'s not clear that smart-but-disposable is the winning combination; a
well-instrumented artillery battery can account for a lot of mobile armor,
without requiring the metal tonnage and fuel supply. Ukraine\'s best defense
might be their non-intercontinental ballistic weaponry. It\'s not high tech, and it
is completely affordable. It also isn\'t offensive to distant cities in other nations.

Hard to tell if an incoming missile is not nuclear
A nervous Russia could answer with a nuclear counterstrike before it even hits.
As Ukrain has indicated it wants to go nuclear.

What would they go nuclear /with/?

What\'s the source and the channel of that information?
Sounds like Russian disinformation.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 02/03/22 18:03, Rick C wrote:

On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 12:49:34 PM UTC-5,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

It needs to be small and light and rugged and cheap.

\"Small and light and rugged and cheap\" don\'t go together.

You could do a lot of damage with that on personnel, like cluster bombs
without being \"rugged\". What is the point of making a Kamikaze drone
rugged?

I\'m wondering if the Russians are actually using thermobaric weapons. I
can\'t see the advantage in it for them compared to the fallout.

Why wouldn\'t they? It isn\'t as if they are NBC. They are
merely explosives that don\'t contain their own oxidiser.

Using them indiscriminately against civilians might be
illegal; I\'m not up to date on the Geneva Conventions.

 

[Martin Brown]

On 03/03/2022 02:31, Fred Bloggs wrote:

On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 10:31:15 AM UTC-5, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
These pics are amazing. They look like the Iraqui army retreating from
Kuwait. Miles of wreckage blocking the roads. Once you blow up a few
tanks and trucks, the rest wait patiently in line to be destroyed.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17816255/incredible-photos-russian-convoy-wreckage-bucha-kyiv/

Javelin type missiles and drones may be doing to tanks what airplanes
did to battleships. Cheap smart weapons destroy a thousand times
bigger and more expensive targets.

Imagine a smart drone with a Hellfire type missile firing straight
down onto a vehicle. Imagine being in a tank under a swarm of them.

In previous wars, the great majority of bullets and artillery shells
and bombs and depth charges and mines and even torpedoes missed their
targets.

Unlikely the lightweight antitank weapons did the damage shown. They were most likely destroyed by demolitions after they were disabled and the Russians left. Tactically un-smart to take a tank column down a stretch of road with impassable barriers on both sides preventing them from dispersing and maneuvering during an attack- not to mention they were ridiculously closely spaced. Russia doesn\'t have a very good military.

Javelin is a two stage shaped charge detonation to defeat reactive
armour and hits tanks from above. That hit might well be enough to see
one off. Once a tank is on fire its own ammunition is a big problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGM-148_Javelin

Be careful what you wish for with autonomous weapons though.
Screamers represents one suitably dystopian future for such warfare.

https://www.imdb.com/video/vi3213951257/?ref_=tt_vi_i_1

Originally a Philip K Dick short story.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Fred Bloggs]

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 6:30:09 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:

On 03/03/2022 02:31, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 10:31:15 AM UTC-5, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
These pics are amazing. They look like the Iraqui army retreating from
Kuwait. Miles of wreckage blocking the roads. Once you blow up a few
tanks and trucks, the rest wait patiently in line to be destroyed.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17816255/incredible-photos-russian-convoy-wreckage-bucha-kyiv/

Javelin type missiles and drones may be doing to tanks what airplanes
did to battleships. Cheap smart weapons destroy a thousand times
bigger and more expensive targets.

Imagine a smart drone with a Hellfire type missile firing straight
down onto a vehicle. Imagine being in a tank under a swarm of them.

In previous wars, the great majority of bullets and artillery shells
and bombs and depth charges and mines and even torpedoes missed their
targets.

Unlikely the lightweight antitank weapons did the damage shown. They were most likely destroyed by demolitions after they were disabled and the Russians left. Tactically un-smart to take a tank column down a stretch of road with impassable barriers on both sides preventing them from dispersing and maneuvering during an attack- not to mention they were ridiculously closely spaced. Russia doesn\'t have a very good military.
Javelin is a two stage shaped charge detonation to defeat reactive
armour and hits tanks from above. That hit might well be enough to see
one off. Once a tank is on fire its own ammunition is a big problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGM-148_Javelin

They didn\'t use the over-hyped Javelin. They used a multiple rocket launch system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BM-21_Grad
It\'s the best way to saturate the whole area with explosive destruction using indirect fire from a distance.

Be careful what you wish for with autonomous weapons though.
Screamers represents one suitably dystopian future for such warfare.

https://www.imdb.com/video/vi3213951257/?ref_=tt_vi_i_1

Originally a Philip K Dick short story.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Phil Hobbs]

Tom Gardner wrote:

On 03/03/22 08:26, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 2 Mar 2022 13:15:18 -0800 (PST)) it happened whit3rd
whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in
e846853a-e283-4896-b964-023d7cecc763n@googlegroups.com>:

On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 8:25:00 AM UTC-8,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

Warfare could become our robots fighting their robots.

It\'s not clear that smart-but-disposable is the winning combination; a
well-instrumented artillery battery can account for a lot of mobile
armor,
without requiring the metal tonnage and fuel supply.     Ukraine\'s
best defense
might be their non-intercontinental ballistic weaponry.  It\'s not
high tech, and it
is completely affordable.   It also isn\'t offensive to distant cities
in other nations.

Hard to tell if an incoming missile is not nuclear
A nervous Russia could answer with a nuclear counterstrike before it
even hits.
As Ukrain has indicated it wants to go nuclear.

What would they go nuclear /with/?

What\'s the source and the channel of that information?
Sounds like Russian disinformation.

One thing that nobody seems to mention is that back in 1991 when the
Soviet Union came apart, Ukraine was full of SS-18 nuclear missiles,
which they gave up in exchange for a Western guarantee of their borders.

Brr.

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 03/03/22 13:52, Phil Hobbs wrote:

Tom Gardner wrote:
On 03/03/22 08:26, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 2 Mar 2022 13:15:18 -0800 (PST)) it happened whit3rd
whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in
e846853a-e283-4896-b964-023d7cecc763n@googlegroups.com>:

On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 8:25:00 AM UTC-8,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

Warfare could become our robots fighting their robots.

It\'s not clear that smart-but-disposable is the winning combination; a
well-instrumented artillery battery can account for a lot of mobile armor,
without requiring the metal tonnage and fuel supply.     Ukraine\'s best defense
might be their non-intercontinental ballistic weaponry.  It\'s not high tech,
and it
is completely affordable.   It also isn\'t offensive to distant cities in
other nations.

Hard to tell if an incoming missile is not nuclear
A nervous Russia could answer with a nuclear counterstrike before it even hits.
As Ukrain has indicated it wants to go nuclear.

What would they go nuclear /with/?

What\'s the source and the channel of that information?
Sounds like Russian disinformation.


One thing that nobody seems to mention is that back in 1991 when the Soviet
Union came apart, Ukraine was full of SS-18 nuclear missiles, which they gave up
in exchange for a Western guarantee of their borders.

Brr.

I have seen that stated - once.

Embarrassing.

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 3:29:32 AM UTC-5, Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Wed, 2 Mar 2022 17:44:44 -0800 (PST)) it happened Rick C
gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote in
a01ba1c5-462d-4143...@googlegroups.com>:
On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 4:28:17 PM UTC-5, Carlos E.R. wrote:
You are mistaken. I\'m watching TV, over the air, everyday; and right now
I\'m listening to the radio. Actual radio. And in my country, internet
coverage is very good. For instance, I have 300 Mbit fibre, because I
refused to have 1 gigabit.

Yes, you define the world. Thank you for your input.
Rick you are wrong
I have several FM radio stations to chose from here in the Netherlands.
All from towers.
Cellphone all from towers.
The cable provider has at its main station satellite dishes for other country programs,
but when power fails nobody has any reception, those and all those cable amplifiers are dead.
The terrestrial DVB TV is from towers.

Anyways, shortly after posting here, Russian RT English speaking channels on satellite went black with only a test tone
on the normal resolution channel, the HD channel lasted a few minutes longer..
www.rt.com worked this morning via internet (4G also from a local tower).
Those towers are interconnected with links via dishes and fiber when one tower goes no telling if the rest has anything.

What remains in bad times is short-wave radio, I have a nice Tecsun PL600 AM FM SSB radio on batteries.
And of course CB (27 MHz) for anybody, who has one and as I have a ham license my other high power transmitters.
I will look up Russia English on shortwave radio later today, wonder is US puppet slaves here will jam it.
China is all over shortwave, BBC was on long wave,,, have not tried it lately.

And my sat dish, the problem is Russia uses the geostationary Astra 2 satellites.
Would not be hard for them to put their own broadcast satellite in or near that same spot,
then EU could not have (force) the Astra club to cut their transmissions.
Then you may get into a satellite shoot out,,,
Fiber is not worth a thing in a war situation with power failures.
I have a solar panel and 250 Ah lifepo4 here to keep stuff running.

Interesting Russia Russian speaking channel on Hotbird satellite was still working last night.
Not sure who controls Hotbird, upload station is in Spain IIRC.
Need to improve my Russian,

Strange how when the Iraq invasion happened by US and NATO I could see Iraq being destroyed on Iraq TV here
via satellite.
All those sanctions on Russia seem a bit preposterous to me
How about doing it to the US?

Jan, you are wrong. A TV tower is a significant expense. A missile costs more than a cell tower. Many cell \"towers\" are the sides of buildings.

When the power is out, no one can tune a radio.

Why do you post such silliness???

--

Rick C.

++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 4:14:19 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 02/03/22 18:03, Rick C wrote:
On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 12:49:34 PM UTC-5,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

It needs to be small and light and rugged and cheap.

\"Small and light and rugged and cheap\" don\'t go together.

You could do a lot of damage with that on personnel, like cluster bombs
without being \"rugged\". What is the point of making a Kamikaze drone
rugged?

I\'m wondering if the Russians are actually using thermobaric weapons. I
can\'t see the advantage in it for them compared to the fallout.
Why wouldn\'t they? It isn\'t as if they are NBC. They are
merely explosives that don\'t contain their own oxidiser.

Using them indiscriminately against civilians might be
illegal; I\'m not up to date on the Geneva Conventions.

Correct. You are not up to date.

--

Rick C.

+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Don]

Jan Panteltje wrote:

<snip>

I have several FM radio stations to chose from here in the Netherlands.
All from towers.
Cellphone all from towers.
The cable provider has at its main station satellite dishes for other
country programs,
but when power fails nobody has any reception, those and all those cable
amplifiers are dead.
The terrestrial DVB TV is from towers.

Anyways, shortly after posting here, Russian RT English speaking channels
on satellite went black with only a test tone
on the normal resolution channel, the HD channel lasted a few minutes longer..
www.rt.com worked this morning via internet (4G also from a local tower).
Those towers are interconnected with links via dishes and fiber when one
tower goes no telling if the rest has anything.

What remains in bad times is short-wave radio, I have a nice Tecsun PL600
AM FM SSB radio on batteries.
And of course CB (27 MHz) for anybody, who has one and as I have a ham
license my other high power transmitters.
I will look up Russia English on shortwave radio later today, wonder is
US puppet slaves here will jam it.
China is all over shortwave, BBC was on long wave,,, have not tried it lately.

And my sat dish, the problem is Russia uses the geostationary Astra 2 satellites.
Would not be hard for them to put their own broadcast satellite in or
near that same spot,
then EU could not have (force) the Astra club to cut their transmissions.
Then you may get into a satellite shoot out,,,
Fiber is not worth a thing in a war situation with power failures.
I have a solar panel and 250 Ah lifepo4 here to keep stuff running.

Interesting Russia Russian speaking channel on Hotbird satellite was
still working last night.
Not sure who controls Hotbird, upload station is in Spain IIRC.
Need to improve my Russian,

Strange how when the Iraq invasion happened by US and NATO I could see
Iraq being destroyed on Iraq TV here
via satellite.
All those sanctions on Russia seem a bit preposterous to me
How about doing it to the US?

So far, the \"portation\" of your RPi I2C code from Linux to FreeBSD kept
me too busy to fire up my ham radio to see what\'s up in the world. My
radio\'s a sweet Elecraft K3 hand assembled by me with love. It feeds
a Cushcraft multi-band vertical.
Anyhow, it\'s time to listen to the ham bands in the background
instead of Yoga music. Well, maybe a little Yoga background music here
and there to relieve stress.
Sanctions seem a sword, double edged, to me. Markets consist of
buyers and sellers. And when you outlaw sellers you also outlaw buyers,
as a perhaps unintended consequence. When you punish buyers you also
punish sellers.

Danke,

--
Don, KB7RPU, https://www.qsl.net/kb7rpu
There was a young lady named Bright Whose speed was far faster than light;
She set out one day In a relative way And returned on the previous night.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 03/03/22 15:24, Rick C wrote:

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 4:14:19 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 02/03/22 18:03, Rick C wrote:
On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 12:49:34 PM UTC-5,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

It needs to be small and light and rugged and cheap.

\"Small and light and rugged and cheap\" don\'t go together.

You could do a lot of damage with that on personnel, like cluster bombs
without being \"rugged\". What is the point of making a Kamikaze drone
rugged?

I\'m wondering if the Russians are actually using thermobaric weapons. I
can\'t see the advantage in it for them compared to the fallout.
Why wouldn\'t they? It isn\'t as if they are NBC. They are
merely explosives that don\'t contain their own oxidiser.

Using them indiscriminately against civilians might be
illegal; I\'m not up to date on the Geneva Conventions.

Correct. You are not up to date.

Correct about what? That there is no difference
between being killed with a weapon that does or
does no contain the oxidiser?

 

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-03-03 16:23, Rick C wrote:

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 3:29:32 AM UTC-5, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 2 Mar 2022 17:44:44 -0800 (PST)) it happened Rick C
gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote in
a01ba1c5-462d-4143...@googlegroups.com>:
On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 4:28:17 PM UTC-5, Carlos E.R. wrote:
You are mistaken. I\'m watching TV, over the air, everyday; and right now
I\'m listening to the radio. Actual radio. And in my country, internet
coverage is very good. For instance, I have 300 Mbit fibre, because I
refused to have 1 gigabit.

Yes, you define the world. Thank you for your input.
Rick you are wrong
I have several FM radio stations to chose from here in the Netherlands.
All from towers.
Cellphone all from towers.
The cable provider has at its main station satellite dishes for other country programs,
but when power fails nobody has any reception, those and all those cable amplifiers are dead.
The terrestrial DVB TV is from towers.

Anyways, shortly after posting here, Russian RT English speaking channels on satellite went black with only a test tone
on the normal resolution channel, the HD channel lasted a few minutes longer..
www.rt.com worked this morning via internet (4G also from a local tower).
Those towers are interconnected with links via dishes and fiber when one tower goes no telling if the rest has anything.

What remains in bad times is short-wave radio, I have a nice Tecsun PL600 AM FM SSB radio on batteries.
And of course CB (27 MHz) for anybody, who has one and as I have a ham license my other high power transmitters.
I will look up Russia English on shortwave radio later today, wonder is US puppet slaves here will jam it.
China is all over shortwave, BBC was on long wave,,, have not tried it lately.

And my sat dish, the problem is Russia uses the geostationary Astra 2 satellites.
Would not be hard for them to put their own broadcast satellite in or near that same spot,
then EU could not have (force) the Astra club to cut their transmissions.
Then you may get into a satellite shoot out,,,
Fiber is not worth a thing in a war situation with power failures.
I have a solar panel and 250 Ah lifepo4 here to keep stuff running.

Interesting Russia Russian speaking channel on Hotbird satellite was still working last night.
Not sure who controls Hotbird, upload station is in Spain IIRC.
Need to improve my Russian,

Strange how when the Iraq invasion happened by US and NATO I could see Iraq being destroyed on Iraq TV here
via satellite.
All those sanctions on Russia seem a bit preposterous to me
How about doing it to the US?

Jan, you are wrong. A TV tower is a significant expense. A missile costs more than a cell tower. Many cell \"towers\" are the sides of buildings.

When the power is out, no one can tune a radio.

Why do you post such silliness???

That\'s only your opinion. Facts are, TV towers exist in many countries
are are in active use by the population.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

 

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-03-03 15:42, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 03/03/22 13:52, Phil Hobbs wrote:
Tom Gardner wrote:
On 03/03/22 08:26, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 2 Mar 2022 13:15:18 -0800 (PST)) it happened
whit3rd
whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in
e846853a-e283-4896-b964-023d7cecc763n@googlegroups.com>:

On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 8:25:00 AM UTC-8,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

Warfare could become our robots fighting their robots.

It\'s not clear that smart-but-disposable is the winning
combination; a well-instrumented artillery battery can
account for a lot of mobile armor, without requiring the
metal tonnage and fuel supply. Ukraine\'s best defense
might be their non-intercontinental ballistic weaponry. It\'s
not high tech, and it is completely affordable. It also
isn\'t offensive to distant cities in other nations.

Hard to tell if an incoming missile is not nuclear
A nervous Russia could answer with a nuclear counterstrike before it
even hits.
As Ukrain has indicated it wants to go nuclear.

What would they go nuclear /with/?

What\'s the source and the channel of that information?
Sounds like Russian disinformation.


One thing that nobody seems to mention is that back in 1991 when the
Soviet Union came apart, Ukraine was full of SS-18 nuclear missiles,
which they gave up in exchange for a Western guarantee of their borders.

Brr.

I have seen that stated - once.

Embarrassing.

It is not that simple.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Ukraine>

Denuclearization

In 1993, International relations theorist and University of Chicago
professor John Mearsheimer published an article including his prediction
that a Ukraine without any nuclear deterrent was likely to be subjected
to aggression by Russia, but this was very much a minority view at the
time.[8]

A study published in 2016 in the journal World Affairs argued that, in
the opinion of the authors, the denuclearization of Ukraine was not a
\"stupid mistake\", and that it is unclear that Ukraine would be better
off as a nuclear state.[9] The study argued that the push for Ukrainian
independence was with a view to make it a nonnuclear state.[9] According
to the authors, the United States would also not have made Ukraine an
exception when it came to the denuclearization of other post-Soviet
states such as Belarus and Kazakhstan.[9] The deterrent value of the
nuclear weapons in Ukraine was also questionable, as Ukraine would have
had to spend 12 to 18 months to establish full operational control over
the nuclear arsenal left by the Russians.[9] The ICBMs also had a range
of 5,000–10,000 km (initially targeting the United States), which meant
that they could only have been re-targeted to hit Russia\'s far east.[9]
The air-launched cruise missiles (ALCMs) left by the Russians had been
disabled by the Russians during the collapse of the Soviet Union, but
even if they had been reconfigured and made to work by the Ukrainians,
it is unlikely that they would have had a deterrent effect.[9] Had
Ukraine decided to establish full operational control of the nuclear
weapons, it would have faced sanctions by the West and perhaps even a
withdrawal of diplomatic recognition by the United States and other NATO
allies.[9] Ukraine would also likely have faced retaliatory action by
Russia.[9] Ukraine would also have struggled with replacing the nuclear
weapons once their service life expired, as Ukraine did not have a
nuclear weapons program.[9] In exchange for giving up its nuclear
weapons, Ukraine received financial compensation, as well as the
security assurances of the Budapest Memorandum.[9]


Budapest Memorandum
Main article: Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances

On December 5, 1994 the leaders of Ukraine, Russia, Britain and the
United States signed a memorandum to provide Ukraine with security
assurances in connection with its accession to the NPT as a non-nuclear
weapon state. The four parties signed the memorandum, containing a
preamble and six paragraphs. The memorandum reads as follows:[10]
....
4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their
commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to
provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to
the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine
should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat
of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.





So it was not a \"Western guarantee of their borders.\", as the Russian
Federation also promised to protect them. And on the other hand, those
nukes were useless to attack Russia.



But all this is offtopic here.


--
Cheers, Carlos.

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 12:06:38 PM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 03/03/22 15:24, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 4:14:19 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 02/03/22 18:03, Rick C wrote:
On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 12:49:34 PM UTC-5,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

It needs to be small and light and rugged and cheap.

\"Small and light and rugged and cheap\" don\'t go together.

You could do a lot of damage with that on personnel, like cluster bombs
without being \"rugged\". What is the point of making a Kamikaze drone
rugged?

I\'m wondering if the Russians are actually using thermobaric weapons. I
can\'t see the advantage in it for them compared to the fallout.
Why wouldn\'t they? It isn\'t as if they are NBC. They are
merely explosives that don\'t contain their own oxidiser.

Using them indiscriminately against civilians might be
illegal; I\'m not up to date on the Geneva Conventions.

Correct. You are not up to date.
Correct about what? That there is no difference
between being killed with a weapon that does or
does no contain the oxidiser?

I get tired of spoon feeding you. Learn how to use Google and do a bit of research... please.

--

Rick C.

---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 12:32:18 PM UTC-5, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2022-03-03 16:23, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 3:29:32 AM UTC-5, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 2 Mar 2022 17:44:44 -0800 (PST)) it happened Rick C
gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote in
a01ba1c5-462d-4143...@googlegroups.com>:
On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 4:28:17 PM UTC-5, Carlos E.R. wrote:
You are mistaken. I\'m watching TV, over the air, everyday; and right now
I\'m listening to the radio. Actual radio. And in my country, internet
coverage is very good. For instance, I have 300 Mbit fibre, because I
refused to have 1 gigabit.

Yes, you define the world. Thank you for your input.
Rick you are wrong
I have several FM radio stations to chose from here in the Netherlands.
All from towers.
Cellphone all from towers.
The cable provider has at its main station satellite dishes for other country programs,
but when power fails nobody has any reception, those and all those cable amplifiers are dead.
The terrestrial DVB TV is from towers.

Anyways, shortly after posting here, Russian RT English speaking channels on satellite went black with only a test tone
on the normal resolution channel, the HD channel lasted a few minutes longer..
www.rt.com worked this morning via internet (4G also from a local tower).
Those towers are interconnected with links via dishes and fiber when one tower goes no telling if the rest has anything.

What remains in bad times is short-wave radio, I have a nice Tecsun PL600 AM FM SSB radio on batteries.
And of course CB (27 MHz) for anybody, who has one and as I have a ham license my other high power transmitters.
I will look up Russia English on shortwave radio later today, wonder is US puppet slaves here will jam it.
China is all over shortwave, BBC was on long wave,,, have not tried it lately.

And my sat dish, the problem is Russia uses the geostationary Astra 2 satellites.
Would not be hard for them to put their own broadcast satellite in or near that same spot,
then EU could not have (force) the Astra club to cut their transmissions.
Then you may get into a satellite shoot out,,,
Fiber is not worth a thing in a war situation with power failures.
I have a solar panel and 250 Ah lifepo4 here to keep stuff running.

Interesting Russia Russian speaking channel on Hotbird satellite was still working last night.
Not sure who controls Hotbird, upload station is in Spain IIRC.
Need to improve my Russian,

Strange how when the Iraq invasion happened by US and NATO I could see Iraq being destroyed on Iraq TV here
via satellite.
All those sanctions on Russia seem a bit preposterous to me
How about doing it to the US?

Jan, you are wrong. A TV tower is a significant expense. A missile costs more than a cell tower. Many cell \"towers\" are the sides of buildings.

When the power is out, no one can tune a radio.

Why do you post such silliness???

That\'s only your opinion. Facts are, TV towers exist in many countries
are are in active use by the population.

No one uses them when the power is out, which is the comment you replied to.

--

Rick C.

---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 03/03/22 17:57, Rick C wrote:

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 12:06:38 PM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 03/03/22 15:24, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 4:14:19 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 02/03/22 18:03, Rick C wrote:
On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 12:49:34 PM UTC-5,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

It needs to be small and light and rugged and cheap.

\"Small and light and rugged and cheap\" don\'t go together.

You could do a lot of damage with that on personnel, like cluster bombs
without being \"rugged\". What is the point of making a Kamikaze drone
rugged?

I\'m wondering if the Russians are actually using thermobaric weapons. I
can\'t see the advantage in it for them compared to the fallout.
Why wouldn\'t they? It isn\'t as if they are NBC. They are
merely explosives that don\'t contain their own oxidiser.

Using them indiscriminately against civilians might be
illegal; I\'m not up to date on the Geneva Conventions.

Correct. You are not up to date.
Correct about what? That there is no difference
between being killed with a weapon that does or
does no contain the oxidiser?

I get tired of spoon feeding you. Learn how to use Google and do a bit of research... please.

And yet again you avoid the point being made in favour
of one which you prefer to answer^H^H^H^H^H^ respond to

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Thu, 3 Mar 2022 07:23:17 -0800 (PST)) it happened Rick C
<gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
<c17246df-5e13-4830-831f-638b72bad12fn@googlegroups.com>:

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 3:29:32 AM UTC-5, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 2 Mar 2022 17:44:44 -0800 (PST)) it happened Rick C
gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote in
a01ba1c5-462d-4143...@googlegroups.com>:
On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 4:28:17 PM UTC-5, Carlos E.R. wrote:
You are mistaken. I\'m watching TV, over the air, everyday; and right now
I\'m listening to the radio. Actual radio. And in my country, internet
coverage is very good. For instance, I have 300 Mbit fibre, because I
refused to have 1 gigabit.

Yes, you define the world. Thank you for your input.
Rick you are wrong
I have several FM radio stations to chose from here in the Netherlands.
All from towers.
Cellphone all from towers.
The cable provider has at its main station satellite dishes for other country programs,
but when power fails nobody has any reception, those and all those cable amplifiers are dead.
The terrestrial DVB TV is from towers.

Anyways, shortly after posting here, Russian RT English speaking channels on satellite went black with only a test tone
on the normal resolution channel, the HD channel lasted a few minutes longer..
www.rt.com worked this morning via internet (4G also from a local tower).
Those towers are interconnected with links via dishes and fiber when one tower goes no telling if the rest has anything.

What remains in bad times is short-wave radio, I have a nice Tecsun PL600 AM FM SSB radio on batteries.
And of course CB (27 MHz) for anybody, who has one and as I have a ham license my other high power transmitters.
I will look up Russia English on shortwave radio later today, wonder is US puppet slaves here will jam it.
China is all over shortwave, BBC was on long wave,,, have not tried it lately.

And my sat dish, the problem is Russia uses the geostationary Astra 2 satellites.
Would not be hard for them to put their own broadcast satellite in or near that same spot,
then EU could not have (force) the Astra club to cut their transmissions.
Then you may get into a satellite shoot out,,,
Fiber is not worth a thing in a war situation with power failures.
I have a solar panel and 250 Ah lifepo4 here to keep stuff running.

Interesting Russia Russian speaking channel on Hotbird satellite was still working last night.
Not sure who controls Hotbird, upload station is in Spain IIRC.
Need to improve my Russian,

Strange how when the Iraq invasion happened by US and NATO I could see Iraq being destroyed on Iraq TV here
via satellite.
All those sanctions on Russia seem a bit preposterous to me
How about doing it to the US?

Jan, you are wrong. A TV tower is a significant expense. A missile costs more than a cell tower. Many cell \"towers\" are the
sides of buildings.

People afraid of 5G have been setting fire to cell towers here, and it caused some emergency services to be cut off too.


>When the power is out, no one can tune a radio.

I even had a solar powered radio from ebay, modified it to a solar powered GPS based clock with geiger counter.. You may need it.
http://panteltje.com/panteltje/pic/gm_pic2/
only used that solar panel...
I have better radios..

https://www.ebay.com/itm/325043045366
https://www.ebay.com/b/Emergency-Portable-AM-FM-Radios/96954/bn_883755
https://www.ebay.com/itm/373227954744
https://www.ebay.com/itm/353320718382

The hand cranked flash light is in the kitchen, it can charge things via USB, well I added the LED light

 

[Lasse Langwadt Christensen]

torsdag den 3. marts 2022 kl. 10.14.19 UTC+1 skrev Tom Gardner:

On 02/03/22 18:03, Rick C wrote:
On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 12:49:34 PM UTC-5,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

It needs to be small and light and rugged and cheap.

\"Small and light and rugged and cheap\" don\'t go together.

You could do a lot of damage with that on personnel, like cluster bombs
without being \"rugged\". What is the point of making a Kamikaze drone
rugged?

I\'m wondering if the Russians are actually using thermobaric weapons. I
can\'t see the advantage in it for them compared to the fallout.
Why wouldn\'t they? It isn\'t as if they are NBC. They are
merely explosives that don\'t contain their own oxidiser.

Using them indiscriminately against civilians might be
illegal; I\'m not up to date on the Geneva Conventions.

doesn\'t matter what weapon you use

article 51(2) of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions,
The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence, the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population, are prohibited

article 48 of Protocol I:
In order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants, and between civilian objects and military objectives, and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 1:57:37 PM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 03/03/22 17:57, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 12:06:38 PM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 03/03/22 15:24, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 4:14:19 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 02/03/22 18:03, Rick C wrote:
On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 12:49:34 PM UTC-5,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

It needs to be small and light and rugged and cheap.

\"Small and light and rugged and cheap\" don\'t go together.

You could do a lot of damage with that on personnel, like cluster bombs
without being \"rugged\". What is the point of making a Kamikaze drone
rugged?

I\'m wondering if the Russians are actually using thermobaric weapons. I
can\'t see the advantage in it for them compared to the fallout.
Why wouldn\'t they? It isn\'t as if they are NBC. They are
merely explosives that don\'t contain their own oxidiser.

Using them indiscriminately against civilians might be
illegal; I\'m not up to date on the Geneva Conventions.

Correct. You are not up to date.
Correct about what? That there is no difference
between being killed with a weapon that does or
does no contain the oxidiser?

I get tired of spoon feeding you. Learn how to use Google and do a bit of research... please.

And yet again you avoid the point being made in favour
of one which you prefer to answer^H^H^H^H^H^ respond to

But, as usual, you made no point to respond to.

Go read and learn something. Being ignorant can be a temporary condition. It\'s up to you.

--

Rick C.

--+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209