18 votes

Megathread for news/updates/discussion of Russian invasion of Ukraine - May 6-8

Automatically posted
Tags: russia, ukraine, recurring, military conflict, war, geopolitics, 2022 russian invasion of ukraine

This thread is posted Monday/Wednesday/Friday - please try to post relevant content in here, such as news, updates, opinion articles, etc. Especially significant updates may warrant a separate topic, but most should be posted here.

If you'd like to help support Ukraine, please visit the official site at https://help.gov.ua/ - an official portal for those who want to provide humanitarian or financial assistance to people of Ukraine, businesses or the government at the times of resistance against the Russian aggression.

27 comments

  1. [9]
    cmccabe
    (edited )
    Link
    More detail and closer to confirmation of news reported yesterday. Russian frigate may have been hit by Ukrainian anti-ship missiles https://www.jpost.com/international/article-706036 EDIT:...

    More detail and closer to confirmation of news reported yesterday.

    Russian frigate may have been hit by Ukrainian anti-ship missiles
    https://www.jpost.com/international/article-706036

    EDIT: replaced mobile site link with normal link.

    6 votes
    1. skybrian
      Link Parent
      To be clear, this is a second ship, the Admiral Makarov. The previous ship they hit was the Moskva.

      To be clear, this is a second ship, the Admiral Makarov. The previous ship they hit was the Moskva.

      2 votes
    2. [7]
      unknown user
      Link Parent
      Has the Moskva hit ever been properly confirmed? If so, who reported on it that's worth a damn?

      Has the Moskva hit ever been properly confirmed? If so, who reported on it that's worth a damn?

      1 vote
      1. [6]
        vektor
        Link Parent
        I think ships at sea are this kind of thing where secondary reporting by news agencies isn't going to do much good. Ukraine said they hit it, I think western agencies have kind of confirmed it,...

        I think ships at sea are this kind of thing where secondary reporting by news agencies isn't going to do much good. Ukraine said they hit it, I think western agencies have kind of confirmed it, meanwhile Russia denies it in a implausible fashion.

        There really isn't too much Reuters and AP can do for you here except report those statements. Eyewitness accounts are all going to be armed forces from one or the other side of the conflict, and they're going to be hard to get by and harder to corroborate.

        Let's put it like this: She's definitely a submarine now. And whether it was a bunch of missiles or the freak combination of a ammunition fire and a storm that no weather report can verify... well, there's not much doubt left in my mind what happened. But I wouldn't expect reputable news services to confirm that, seeing as trustworthy parties (or those with evidence) are probably keeping it rather tight lipped right now.

        8 votes
        1. [5]
          unknown user
          Link Parent
          That's what I'm getting it: what's the line beyond which we can be relatively assured of a hit being real? Not trying to dig into the "what is real" aspect of reporting in news around an active...

          That's what I'm getting it: what's the line beyond which we can be relatively assured of a hit being real?

          Not trying to dig into the "what is real" aspect of reporting in news around an active military conflict. But like, how much confirmation would be enough here for us to switch language from "it's unconfirmed yet but" to "so it has happened that"?

          1 vote
          1. [3]
            vektor
            Link Parent
            Well, Wikipedia lists it as "Sunk by Ukraine[disputed by Russia]", quoting the Washington Post. That's good enough for me, but your standards may vary.

            Well, Wikipedia lists it as "Sunk by Ukraine[disputed by Russia]", quoting the Washington Post.

            That's good enough for me, but your standards may vary.

            5 votes
            1. [2]
              unknown user
              Link Parent
              So then, would a similar quote be enough for you for the second ship?

              So then, would a similar quote be enough for you for the second ship?

              1. vektor
                Link Parent
                For me, yeah. Give it a few days maybe for the Russians to prove the opposite (lol) but otherwise, yeah. For now I'm sticking with Admiral Makarov being hit. It's rumored to be abandoned or sunk,...

                For me, yeah. Give it a few days maybe for the Russians to prove the opposite (lol) but otherwise, yeah.

                For now I'm sticking with Admiral Makarov being hit. It's rumored to be abandoned or sunk, but I haven't heard that from anyone credible. If the people calling it sunk also call it a cruiser, I choose to ignore, ya know?

                2 votes
          2. Autoxidation
            Link Parent
            The US also says it was hit by Ukrainian missiles. There was also this from a few days ago: U.S. Intelligence Helped Ukraine Strike Russian Flagship, Officials Say

            The US also says it was hit by Ukrainian missiles.

            Despite claims by Russia that an accidental fire broke out on the ship, U.S. officials confirmed on Friday that two Ukrainian Neptune missiles had struck the vessel, killing an unknown number of sailors and sending it and its arsenal to the bottom of the Black Sea.

            There was also this from a few days ago: U.S. Intelligence Helped Ukraine Strike Russian Flagship, Officials Say

            The United States provided intelligence that helped Ukrainian forces locate and strike the flagship of Russia’s Black Sea fleet last month, another sign that the administration is easing its self-imposed limitations on how far it will go in helping Ukraine fight Russia, U.S. officials said.

            The targeting help, which contributed to the eventual sinking of the flagship, the Moskva, is part of a continuing classified effort by the Biden administration to provide real-time battlefield intelligence to Ukraine.

            2 votes
  2. [10]
    cfabbro
    Link
    Russia Just Lost Its Most Advanced Operational Tank In Ukraine (TheDrive)

    Russia Just Lost Its Most Advanced Operational Tank In Ukraine (TheDrive)

    The war in Ukraine has had its fair share of embarrassments for the Kremlin. From the sinking of the Slava class cruiser Moskva in April to the infamous 40-mile-long Russian military convoy holdup near Kyiv seen earlier in the conflict, Moscow has had little to cheer about in terms of projecting competent military strength. The latest hit comes via visual evidence that a Russian T-90M Proryv-3 (Breakthrough-3) — a modern and rare main battle tank — has been destroyed on the battlefield by Ukrainian forces.

    Shared on Twitter by The Kyiv Independent’s defense reporter Illia Ponomarenko, the image, dated May 4, shows what appears to be the remnants of a T-90M tank, still smoldering after a direct hit somewhere within Ukraine’s northeastern Kharkiv Oblast. Andriy Tsaplienko is seen reporting in the foreground.

    News of what appears to be the first T-90M tank destroyed in Ukraine should lift the spirits of the Ukrainian forces, given its status as the most technologically advanced and capable tank within Russia’s frontline military arsenal. The initial batch of production T-90M tanks were only issued to the 2nd Guards M. I. Kalinin Taman Motor Rifle Division of the 1st Guards Tank Army in the spring of 2020, with recent estimates suggesting that only 100 or so models are currently in service in total. The much-hyped, but still not proven, T-14 Armata main battle tanks, aren't yet ready for frontline combat and are in very short supply. This is mainly due to the financial realities of producing a brand new tank and the development it takes to make it actually work as promised. So, the Uralvagonzavod-designed T-90M serves as an important update to the T-90 line of tanks, first introduced in the early 1990s as a direct outgrowth of the T-72. The T-90M follows the T-90MS Proryv-2 (Breakthrough 2), an upgrade of the export-centered T-90S variant, which was revealed in 2011.

    The tank’s destruction reflects Moscow’s readiness to commit such high-end materiel in battle. This comes amid Russia’s wider concentration of its forces in the east of Ukraine, in a bid to further exert control over the eastern Donbas region. Early evidence that Russia may have committed some of its limited supply of T-90M tanks to the conflict began to surface in April. Video evidence released by the National Guard of Russia (Rosgvardia) on April 25, which has since circulated on social media, revealed a crudely concealed T-90M tank in Kharkiv Oblast.

    Boasting an improved 2A46M-4 125mm smoothbore main gun in a modernized turret, the T-90M is encased with advanced armor-protection and countermeasures capabilities. Relikt built-in explosive reactive armor (ERA) is designed to protect against shaped charges and minimizes the impact of armor-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS) rounds.

    Additionally, the tank features slat armor in places and can also be equipped with net armor, both of which are designed to improve its defenses against rocket-propelled grenades. Its countermeasures include smoke grenade launchers, which can further help to conceal it, including from infantry with anti-tank weaponry. Major sensor and fire control enhancements make up the heart of the T-90M upgrade, as well as an advanced remote weapon station. The tank's environmental and propulsion systems, as well as its ammo handling system, are all upgraded, as well. These upgrades don't seem to have helped the T-90M in question, which stands as the first confirmed loss of the type.

    Regardless of why T-90M tanks do not appear to have been used in the conflict until more recently, photos of Russia's most advanced operational tank, destroyed on Ukrainian soil, won't sit well with the Russian Army, the image of which as a feared combat force has degraded to a degree few would have imagined over the last two and a half months.

    6 votes
    1. [9]
      cmccabe
      Link Parent
      Adding to this, another article mentions that "The Defense Ministry said the tank was hit by Ukrainian forces with an American Javelin anti-tank missile system near Izyum."

      Adding to this, another article mentions that "The Defense Ministry said the tank was hit by Ukrainian forces with an American Javelin anti-tank missile system near Izyum."

      4 votes
      1. [8]
        unknown user
        Link Parent
        of course they mention it's American

        of course they mention it's American

        1. [7]
          cfabbro
          Link Parent
          I don't understand. Why wouldn't they mention it?

          I don't understand. Why wouldn't they mention it?

          2 votes
          1. [6]
            unknown user
            Link Parent
            Nevermind, I misread. I thought the MoD in question was Russian, and so were the reports. Ukrainians mentioning it's American is okay: they raise morale, ever so slightly, among their people by...

            Nevermind, I misread. I thought the MoD in question was Russian, and so were the reports.

            Ukrainians mentioning it's American is okay: they raise morale, ever so slightly, among their people by indicating the West supports their war efforts. Russians mentioning it's American would just be stoking anti-Western sentiment among the populace.

            3 votes
            1. cfabbro
              Link Parent
              Ah, that makes sense. Yeah, it was the Ukranian MoD that made the statement.

              Ah, that makes sense. Yeah, it was the Ukranian MoD that made the statement.

            2. [4]
              skybrian
              Link Parent
              It's funny how differently the same fact is interpreted depending on who is saying it? Some sources are more credible than others, but I don't think it's wrong to say things that are true,...

              It's funny how differently the same fact is interpreted depending on who is saying it? Some sources are more credible than others, but I don't think it's wrong to say things that are true, regardless of who says them.

              1. [3]
                MimicSquid
                Link Parent
                Ehhh... Grices Third Maxim alone gives plenty of reasons to think about what true things are said, because even truth can mislead or direct people to believe an untruth. It's not like truth alone...

                Ehhh... Grices Third Maxim alone gives plenty of reasons to think about what true things are said, because even truth can mislead or direct people to believe an untruth. It's not like truth alone is the useful arbiter of whether it's wrong to say something in a particular situation.

                1. [2]
                  skybrian
                  Link Parent
                  Sure, context matters. I don't think anything put out by the Russian government is trustworthy or much worth spending time on. However, more generally, I still think an argument that's careful...

                  Sure, context matters. I don't think anything put out by the Russian government is trustworthy or much worth spending time on.

                  However, more generally, I still think an argument that's careful about its facts (and ideally, sourcing) can be worth reading, even when it's in support of a conclusion you reject.

                  1 vote
                  1. MimicSquid
                    Link Parent
                    Absolutely. Unpleasant truths are important to consider, even when they're offered by unpleasant people. I'm just hesitant about the idea that speaking the truth is inherently right.

                    Absolutely. Unpleasant truths are important to consider, even when they're offered by unpleasant people. I'm just hesitant about the idea that speaking the truth is inherently right.

                    1 vote
  3. vektor
    (edited )
    Link
    After Merz' visit to Ukraine (opposition leader), which didn't kick up a lot of dust(E: although, Zelenskyy did meet with Merz), a whole host of government officials have announced plans to go to...

    After Merz' visit to Ukraine (opposition leader), which didn't kick up a lot of dust(E: although, Zelenskyy did meet with Merz), a whole host of government officials have announced plans to go to Ukraine:

    Steinmeier (president) and Scholz (chancellor) are invited for the 9th of May, which is the day of German capitulation. I imagine that date was deliberately chosen, probably with consent from Germany. I expect this visit to kick up a lot more dust. It happened after a phone call between Steinmeier and Zelenskyy to sort out the butthurt. (E: To clarify, Scholz and Steinmeier have not announced plans. I wouldn't expect them to until they're back.)

    Also, Foreign Minister Baerbock has announced plans to go.

    The president of the German parliament has announced similar plans as well.

    Also, 7 German PzH2000 will be sent, along with training.

    5 votes
  4. [5]
    cfabbro
    Link
    Italy impounds $700 million megayacht linked to Putin (WaPo)

    Italy impounds $700 million megayacht linked to Putin (WaPo)

    Italian financial authorities said Friday that they have impounded a $700 million megayacht that has been linked in media reports and by anti-Kremlin groups to Russian President Vladimir Putin. But an element of mystery remains: Italy, in what it called its “freezing decree,” did not say who the owner might be.

    Italian investigators had raced to investigate the vessel and prevent it from leaving the Tuscan port of Marina di Carrara. The yacht, known as the Scheherazade, had been undergoing repairs since before Russia invaded Ukraine. But this week, it returned to the water, according to a New York Times reporter who visited the marina, prompting fears that the vessel might depart and evade sanctions.

    The ship, until the measures imposed Friday evening, would have been free to leave.

    In announcing its action, Italy’s Finance Ministry said the yacht’s owner had “prominent” links with Russians already under European Union sanctions. The name of the owner was not specified, and Italy said only that its government had asked the E.U. to add the person to its sanctions list.

    A spokesman for the Finance Ministry described Italy’s move as “provisional.”

    Italy “proposed to the Council of the European Union the inclusion of the owner of the boat in the list,” the spokesman said. “Until then, the name cannot be public.”

    In March, an investigation by the Italian daily La Stampa named the boat’s owner as Eduard Khudainatov, a former Russian oil executive. But the newspaper also raised a question about how somebody not listed as a billionaire could afford to purchase one of the world’s most luxurious yachts.

    So, speculation about the Scheherazade has only intensified. Investigators working for jailed Russian opposition politician Alexei Navalny say the yacht’s owner is Putin himself. In March, Navalny’s team published what it said was the crew list of people who had worked on the yacht. They purportedly include members of the Russian state agency responsible for Putin’s personal protection.

    “We think that this is a solid enough proof that Scheherazade belongs to Putin himself and must be immediately seized,” said Maria Pevchikh, the head of the Navalny-founded FBK investigation team.

    2 votes
    1. [4]
      unknown user
      (edited )
      Link Parent
      So my question is: Even after all the FBK analysis (I've watched the video and found the proof compelling, if in some ways driven by wishful thinking)... Is Vladimir Putin not under sanctions yet?...

      So my question is:

      Even after all the FBK analysis (I've watched the video and found the proof compelling, if in some ways driven by wishful thinking)... Is Vladimir Putin not under sanctions yet? That seems like quite an oversight by the EU.

      Beyond that:

      Putin's riches belonging to someone else on paper is par for the course. His mansion, not too recently also uncovered by the FBK, on paper belonged to an oligarch. His off-shore cash uncovered by the Panama Papers belonged to his friend. Apartments for his daughters belonged, if I recall correctly, to his then-wife. And so on and so forth. Putin's all about plausible deniability.

      So it could technically belong to a billionaire friend of his. Doesn't mean it's not Putin's.

      EDIT: apparently Putin is under EU sanctions already, from the very start of the war.

      2 votes
      1. [3]
        NoblePath
        Link Parent
        Thread hijack: What is “ownership?” Under English law, technically everything belongs to the crown, and everyone else uses or occupies it by dispensation of the monarch. In US, the “people” have...

        Thread hijack:

        What is “ownership?” Under English law, technically everything belongs to the crown, and everyone else uses or occupies it by dispensation of the monarch.

        In US, the “people” have certain “rights,” regarding property, defined and enforced by the government.

        I assume in the Russian Federation they have a third view. I know there are maritime treaties regulating registration and operations. I winder how respectful they are of various theories of property.

        1 vote
        1. [2]
          cfabbro
          (edited )
          Link Parent
          Do you happen to have any links about this? Because I don't see any mention of that in the Wikipedia article on English property law, and TBH it sounds apocryphal.

          Under English law, technically everything belongs to the crown, and everyone else uses or occupies it by dispensation of the monarch.

          Do you happen to have any links about this? Because I don't see any mention of that in the Wikipedia article on English property law, and TBH it sounds apocryphal.

          1. NoblePath
            (edited )
            Link Parent
            I mean in current practice it works like the article you cited. I don’t have a source handy, but lawyers learn it while studying property law. If you click through you can see the history of how...

            I mean in current practice it works like the article you cited. I don’t have a source handy, but lawyers learn it while studying property law.

            If you click through you can see the history of how property proceeds from the crown. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_English_land_law

            Edit: more in this article

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_tenure_in_England

            For American law, google “bundle of rights”

            1 vote
  5. [2]
    cfabbro
    Link
    Trudeau makes surprise visit to Ukraine, meets with Zelensky (CBC)

    Trudeau makes surprise visit to Ukraine, meets with Zelensky (CBC)

    Prime Minister Justin Trudeau paid a surprise visit to Kyiv on Sunday, where he met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and briefly toured a blackened, bombed-out suburban community.

    At the same time, he reopened the Canadian Embassy and welcomed the ambassador back to the embattled capital.

    The prime minister's visit was carried out under a news blackout. However, photos of Trudeau's visit to Irpin were posted on Twitter by the city's mayor, who met with Trudeau.

    Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland and Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly are also in Ukraine with the prime minister.

    2 votes
    1. cfabbro
      Link Parent
      First lady Jill Biden makes unannounced trip to Ukraine (CNN)

      First lady Jill Biden makes unannounced trip to Ukraine (CNN)

      First lady Jill Biden spent part of Mother's Day making an unannounced trip to Uzhhorod, Ukraine, a small city in the far southwestern corner of Ukraine, a country that for the last 10 weeks has been under invasion by Russia.

      At a converted school that now serves as temporary housing for displaced citizens, Biden met with Ukrainian first lady Olena Zelenska, who has not been seen in public since the start of the war on February 24.

      "I wanted to come on Mother's Day," Biden said to her Ukrainian counterpart, the two women seated at a small table in a classroom of a former school that is now a source of temporary housing for displaced Ukrainians, including 48 children. "We thought it was important to show the Ukrainian people this war has to stop. And this war has been brutal." Biden added, "The people of the United States stand with the people of Ukraine."

      Zelenska, who early on in the Russian invasion sent a letter to Biden, has exchanged correspondence with her American counterpart in recent weeks, US officials tell CNN.

      "First of all, I would like to thank you for a very courageous act," said Zelenska, speaking through an interpreter to Biden. "Because we understand what it takes for the US first lady to come here during a war when the military actions are taking place every day, where the air sirens are happening every day, even today. We all feel your support and we all feel the leadership of the US President but we would like to note that the Mother's Day is a very symbolic day for us because we also feel your love and support during such an important day."

      The meeting of the two women included a closed-door bilateral, which lasted for about one hour and took place at what was a school before the war. The building has been transformed into a refuge, a collaboration between the government of Ukraine and the International Organization for Migration, the UN migration agency. Dozens of internally displaced persons now live in the building, on a leafy property near the city center of Uzhhorod.

      3 votes