Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Ukraine invasion discussion thread part 11

999 replies

ScatteredMama82 · 09/03/2022 15:43

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/4499310-Ukraine-invasion-discussion-thread-part-10?pg=40

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
Ijsbear · 10/03/2022 08:43

True, RedTooth, they would be. Dark would mitigate that a bit? but planes would be targetted yes. Dangerous. notimagain I realise that that would break the no-fly zone and escalate things. But as I said I think that Putin will try to go to war to a greater or lesser extent one way or another in the long run anyway. Maybe a measured, and I emphasise measured, decision to bring humanitarian relief to the ground would send a message to him. Whether that relief could be sustained - well, probably not.

Ok probably a very bad idea. Which is why I'm so glad I'm not making the decisions.

ClaudineClare · 10/03/2022 08:43

Sorry, just putting this irrelevant comment in because this thread keeps going Awol from my I'm On and Watched lists for some odd reason. Just want to see if it reappears now.

Ijsbear · 10/03/2022 08:48

@sirfredfredgeorge

Since then there have been advances in the range and types of chemicals that have the right characteristics to be delivered by a missile, plus of course in the types of missiles and devices that can deliver the chemicals to the battlefield

but not really, since chemical weapons have always been a failure on the battlefield, they simply don't work against soldiers - a gas mask and a hazmat suit defeats almost all use in a way in which a normal explosion doesn't. They're also expensive, they degrade way more than normal explosives so you have to keep building new stocks.

The countries banned them, not because they're amoral, but because they don't work, so there's no problem banning them, land mines are just as amoral, but the countries keep those (or stay in defence alliances with countries which keep them)

Obviously as a fear weapon, and against unarmed people they're a bit more effective, but still less effective than conventional explosives, remember the Skripal's survived an individual targeted attack, remote delivery of large volumes is a huge waste, the only person who died in Salisbury sprayed it themselves directly onto their skin in large volumes.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_massacre

They can be extremely effective, more so than explosives.

The Russians only need say "Ukrainian nazis are gassing their own people!" for a good home propeganda win.

Jisforjelly · 10/03/2022 08:48

Just saw Liz Truss is speaking later. Hoping she’s not going to put us in it again. Last time she messed up royally.

FacebookPhotos · 10/03/2022 08:52

there's been a little too much belief that Ukraine can actually win and in the long term that will hit Western psyche harder (the despair element to moral). Especially if this is long or drawn out.

I think you are right here. This is a David and Goliath fight, but in real life David almost never wins.

It is a difficult balance for Western governments. They need to justify serious sanctions against Russia, causing hardship at home - which they can do because of atrocities committed, along with the "he won't stop at Ukraine" rhetoric. But at the same time Western governments don't want to have the public baying for NATO to get involved, because that could easily lead somewhere very dangerous for their own civilian populations.

I am so very glad I don't have to make these kinds of decisions.

MarshaBradyo · 10/03/2022 09:02

Where effectively his position is who knows if there would be a wider NATO or nuclear conflict (ie a lower probability) but we do know people are dying and suffering in Ukraine now (a higher probability).

I understand why he would say this, anyone would use all arguments in same position, but the scale of potential destruction surely is a factor in any risk calculation.

KevinTurvysGravy · 10/03/2022 09:03

Pmk, thanks to all contributors Brew

MarshaBradyo · 10/03/2022 09:05

Js thanks for your post

I remind myself that whilst we react to media, and images in particular, those making decisions are basing them in intelligence reports etc which is less provocative

UnmentionedElephantDildo · 10/03/2022 09:11

@Leafblowing

Looks like covid is back in the headlines

“Covid has not gone away, as hospital admissions in elderly increase”

I don’t know about any of you, but I don’t think during a pandemic is a great time to get involved in a war ? Imagine if it started spreading again and the military were all down with it.

cases are up 46% (the rolling weekly numbers, it was 'only' up 36% on yesterday's) so there is a lot about again.

We'd been down to 347 per 100k last week, but it's back up and now at 409.

(Admissions up 12% and deaths up 19% if you were wondering. Test number marginally down)

Now, the numbers here won't make any difference to what happens in Ukraine, but it is a reminder that it's not gone away, and could yet be a factor.

notimagain · 10/03/2022 09:16

@Ijsbear

True, RedTooth, they would be. Dark would mitigate that a bit? but planes would be targetted yes. Dangerous. notimagain I realise that that would break the no-fly zone and escalate things. But as I said I think that Putin will try to go to war to a greater or lesser extent one way or another in the long run anyway. Maybe a measured, and I emphasise measured, decision to bring humanitarian relief to the ground would send a message to him. Whether that relief could be sustained - well, probably not.

Ok probably a very bad idea. Which is why I'm so glad I'm not making the decisions.

Reference the “dark” comment.

It’s true there has been some surprise at the lack of Russian forces ability to operate in the dark (poor/non-existent night vision aids at individual soldier level).

OTOH there’s radar. It’s not really clear to the public how well or badly the Russian radar equipped mobile SAM systems are operating, and there’s the possible threat of radar laid Anti Aircraft Artillery. Yes, I know any minute now somebody will probably pop up with “but countermeasures”….but despite the designers best efforts they don’t always work (“do you feel lucky”)…

As a result I’m not sure you’d get many volunteers wanting to fly C-130s, C-17s or similar performing a low level drop over the cities in contested air space and volunteers or not I’m not sure the NATO commanders would be willing to risk losing valuable and limited assets.

Of course I’d happily be proved wrong and it would be great if NATO intelligence says, nope, it’ll be a doodle, it’s low risk, and such drops are actually performed.

PestorPeston · 10/03/2022 09:18

Rafael Mariano Grossi head of IAEA is on his way to Turkey. Nuclear reactors will be represented at the talks.

MerryMarigold · 10/03/2022 09:20

*They’d rather help in other ways. Even by housing a refugee family.

Why don’t those of you who are feeling so incensed by it all do something like that?*

Would love to but hardly anyone allowed in at the moment. In Germany people are driving to the borders to pick people up. I know many people who would be willing even to do this but there is no point if they get stuck at Calais.

MarshaBradyo · 10/03/2022 09:22

@MerryMarigold

*They’d rather help in other ways. Even by housing a refugee family.

Why don’t those of you who are feeling so incensed by it all do something like that?*

Would love to but hardly anyone allowed in at the moment. In Germany people are driving to the borders to pick people up. I know many people who would be willing even to do this but there is no point if they get stuck at Calais.

Merry there are some on here using this charity

I haven’t but it looks good

www.refugeesathome.org/

Ijsbear · 10/03/2022 09:23

notim I know radar exists and there really would be the possibility of losses of aircraft (and personnel).

More significantly, it would change the tone of the war so far, which is a greater factor and the consequences would have to be assessed by Those Who Are Trained.

If this was feasible, do some of the Private Military Companies have aircraft? helicopters? So that the involvement of any actual country could be avoided.

But this was just an idea and if it's a bad one, fine =)

Oldmrswasherwoman · 10/03/2022 09:25

@WeAreTheHeroes

The Covid vaccination rates in Ukraine pre-war were 39%. They're not much better in the countries Ukrainians are fleeing to, apart from Hungary. With all those people packed together on trains and in queues there's the potential for a huge rise in cases in Eastern Europe.
I've been thinking about this - covid hasn't gone away and presumably is still circulating in Ukraine and people are still getting ill to a greater or lesser degree. The viral load of those sheltering in basements, fleeing on trains, is going to be high - I don't panic lots about covid but it seems like the perfect breeding ground for a new variant? I know in the scheme of things the Ukrainians have no options and survival is their priority but its another potential future problem to lay at Putins door. (Hope he catches it if so).
BeyondPurpleTulips · 10/03/2022 09:26

Has anyone else noticed that there seems to be an advance specifically towards the Southern Ukraine power station?

Ukraine invasion discussion thread part 11
mpsw · 10/03/2022 09:26

The Russians are tying up a lot of military-diplomatic effort in dangling the prospect of ceasefires for humanitarian corridors and no doubt fir air drops too idc.

Mariupol is, I fear, stuffed. It sits in the middle of territory which will be important to the Russians as it is the ground which links the Crimea to Russia, and through which they will advance their attacks on the south.

TokyoSushi · 10/03/2022 09:28

They've sanctioned Abramovich, about time too!

TokyoSushi · 10/03/2022 09:29

@BeyondPurpleTulips

Has anyone else noticed that there seems to be an advance specifically towards the Southern Ukraine power station?
Yes, that's not good at all. Agree about Mariupol, it seems awful there.
CaveMum · 10/03/2022 09:30

For those that are concerned about the prospect of nuclear weapons being used, I’ve just seen that today’s “History Hit” podcast is focussing on this issue. I haven’t listened to it yet, I’m about to, but though I’d link to it here.

This is the summary:

“While Ukraine fights to defend itself from Russian forces, Putin makes a nuclear threat to the west and the rest of the world. Dr Jeremy Garlick, Associate Professor of International Relations and China Studies at the University of Economics, Prague, explains the strategies currently being used by Russia and the West, ‘game theory’ and nuclear deterrence between these two opposing forces through recent history.“

podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/dan-snows-history-hit/id1042631089?i=1000553502471

Gingerwarthog · 10/03/2022 09:32

Roman Abramovitch has been sanctioned.

Gingerwarthog · 10/03/2022 09:32

Sorry @TokyoSushi
Just saw you posted this earlier

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 10/03/2022 09:33

I started to watch Question Time last night. The ex prime minister of Denmark was on. She was amazing. There was some senior lecturer in war studies and Ukraine, he was also very interesting.

Then Dd age 15 came down and talked through the last 20 minutes of it😭. It wasn’t on iplayer last night. But if it does appear it worth watching. Very much so.

Ivegottagoforaliedown · 10/03/2022 09:35

@Gingerwarthog

Roman Abramovitch has been sanctioned.
Read this as "sectioned" Grin
CaveMum · 10/03/2022 09:36

Here's the full Treasury document relating to Abramovitch's sanction.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1059927/Russia.pdf