On Friday, Melitopol mayor, Ivan Fedorov, was seen on video being led away from a government building in the city by armed men.
A short time later, the Russian-backed Luhansk regional prosecutor claimed that Fedorov had committed terrorism offenses and was under investigation. According to a message on the Luhansk prosecutor's website, Fedorov is being accused of assisting and financing terrorist activities and being part of a criminal community.
On Saturday, the Zaporozhye regional administration installed a new mayor, Galina Danilchenko, a former member of the city council.
In her televised statement, which was posted by the regional administration on Telegram, Danilchenko said that her "main task is to take all necessary steps to get the city back to normal."
looks like we have one of our first major collaborators in Danilchenko.
I am kind of curious, but is there a reason why sending weapons needs to be announced publicly, especially on Twitter?
It seems like it would be better to keep it under wraps.
Apparently countries can't just do the defacto right thing without some public self-patting.
You bring up a very good point that announcing any kind of aid isn't exactly wise. Keep it between you and the guys in the know on the other end. I suspect it plays into your favour to be secretive about what your side is working with in any kind of war.
The Following User Says Thank You to djsFlames For This Useful Post:
On Friday, Melitopol mayor, Ivan Fedorov, was seen on video being led away from a government building in the city by armed men.
A short time later, the Russian-backed Luhansk regional prosecutor claimed that Fedorov had committed terrorism offenses and was under investigation. According to a message on the Luhansk prosecutor's website, Fedorov is being accused of assisting and financing terrorist activities and being part of a criminal community.
On Saturday, the Zaporozhye regional administration installed a new mayor, Galina Danilchenko, a former member of the city council.
In her televised statement, which was posted by the regional administration on Telegram, Danilchenko said that her "main task is to take all necessary steps to get the city back to normal."
looks like we have one of our first major collaborators in Danilchenko.
Hard to judge that woman. She didn't help Russians take the city. The city fell long ago. What is she supposed to do now? Throw a Molotov at nearby tank and get killed on the spot. Remaining citizens need some kind of mayor to somewhat restore life. If she's genuinely trying to do it, what's wrong?
80-90 million? 6-7 billion. No need for the bomb to drop on your head for you to die from nuclear war.
Respectfully disagree. The notion that all of humanity dies in a nuclear war is not correct. In fact not even remotely correct.
Please refer to the maximum blast radius on a nuclear bomb, the number of towns, villages and cities on Earth, the number of nukes between the States and Russia.
People like you and I will die, sure. Maybe though, there will be rural areas in Canada that will be fine. Africa? Fine. Why do you think Russia or the United States are sending nukes to Johannesburg, Sao Paulo or Nepal?
The world is a big place, nukes don’t cover all territory. Be realistic. This is the same thing as climate change “all of humanity will die”- no it won’t, read the reports themselves, they don’t even say this. Nuclear war will kill a #### ton of people but not all of the earth. You and I will die, but there will be actually huge portions of the planet untouched.
I think it's a tough situation but I really hope that a lot more of that donated equipment and weapons is making it's way into the proper hands and the counteroffensive becomes stronger.
What is happening to some of these cities is just devastating and the people are suffering untold levels of physical and phycological terror.
We all have to take some of the information we hear in some ways with a grain a salt, I know that there was a lot of reports last Saturday or so that Russia may have had another 2-3 days worth of ammo and other stockpile of weapons and missiles. The quotes were something along the lines of "Russian army on the verge of collapse" Clearly they are still getting resupplied have an adequate supply of weapons as things seem to be increasing.
Hopefully some of the back channel diplomatic work is actually getting some progress. I am still of the mindset about how best we deal with Putin so that this does stop at this stage but history and his past will show it will not.
Just the other day the strong warnings came about Finland and Sweden joining NATO and not to even think about it. Putin thinks of NATO as a puppet government on HIS doorstep and will not tolerate it. Something has to give.
All these memes ring hollow, Kyiv will likely fall in a few days.
Browsing through YouTube for military analysis and that seems to be the consensus. The longest estimate I heard was two weeks before Kyiv falls. It seems to be a foregone conclusion by the “experts”.
Respectfully disagree. The notion that all of humanity dies in a nuclear war is not correct. In fact not even remotely correct.
He said 6-7 billion. There are 7.75 billion. So, most of humanity, but not all of it. That death toll projection might be high... we don't know for sure. But it's not out of the question.
Quote:
People like you and I will die, sure. Maybe though, there will be rural areas in Canada that will be fine. Africa? Fine. Why do you think Russia or the United States are sending nukes to Johannesburg, Sao Paulo or Nepal?
Do you understand what a nuclear winter is? Do you understand what happens to the global climate in that circumstance? What happens to the growing season in the bread basket latitudes? The vast majority of people who don't die in the immediate aftermath will die in the ensuing 10 years after global temperatures decrease precipitously.
You seem to be under the impression that nuclear weapons simply explode, and if you dodge that, you'll be fine. You are hilariously mistaken.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Respectfully disagree. The notion that all of humanity dies in a nuclear war is not correct. In fact not even remotely correct.
Please refer to the maximum blast radius on a nuclear bomb, the number of towns, villages and cities on Earth, the number of nukes between the States and Russia.
People like you and I will die, sure. Maybe though, there will be rural areas in Canada that will be fine. Africa? Fine. Why do you think Russia or the United States are sending nukes to Johannesburg, Sao Paulo or Nepal?
The world is a big place, nukes don’t cover all territory. Be realistic. This is the same thing as climate change “all of humanity will die”- no it won’t, read the reports themselves, they don’t even say this. Nuclear war will kill a #### ton of people but not all of the earth. You and I will die, but there will be actually huge portions of the planet untouched.
If you are only considering direct deaths, but the long term environmental consequences would be much more devastating.
If global nuclear famine could result from just 100 nuclear detonations, what might be the result of a fuller exchange of the several thousand warheads held in current inventories by the US and Russia?
One 2008 study looked at a Russia-US nuclear war scenario, where Russia would target 2,200 weapons on Western countries and the US would target 1,100 weapons each on China and Russia. In total, therefore, 4,400 warheads detonate, equivalent to roughly half the current inventories held each by Russia and the US.
Nuclear weapons held by other states were not used in this scenario, which has a 440-Mt explosive yield, equivalent to about 150 times all the bombs detonated in World War II. This full-scale nuclear war was estimated to cause 770 million direct deaths and generate 180 Tg of soot from burning cities and forests. In the US, about half the population would be within 5km of a ground zero, and a fifth of the country’s citizens would be killed outright.
A subsequent study, published in 2019, looked at a comparable but slightly lower 150 Tg atmospheric soot injection following an equivalent scale nuclear war. The devastation causes so much smoke that only 30-40 percent of sunlight reaches the Earth’s surface for the subsequent six months.
A massive drop in temperature follows, with the weather staying below freezing throughout the subsequent Northern Hemisphere summer. In Iowa, for example, the model shows temperatures staying below 0°C for 730 days straight. There is no growing season. This is a true nuclear winter.
Nor is it just a short blip. Temperatures still drop below freezing in summer for several years thereafter, and global precipitation falls by half by years three and four. It takes over a decade for anything like climatic normality to return to the planet.
By this time, most of Earth’s human population will be long dead. The world’s food production would crash by more than 90 percent, causing global famine that would kill billions by starvation. In most countries less than a quarter of the population survives by the end of year two in this scenario. Global fish stocks are decimated and the ozone layer collapses.
The models are eerily specific. In the 4,400 warhead/150 Tg soot nuclear war scenario, averaged over the subsequent five years, China sees a reduction in food calories of 97.2 percent, France by 97.5 percent, Russia by 99.7 percent, the UK by 99.5 percent and the US by 98.9 percent. In all these countries, virtually everyone who survived the initial blasts would subsequently starve.
Human extinction?
Even the 150 Tg soot nuclear war scenario is orders of magnitude less than the amount of smoke and other particulates put into the atmosphere by the asteroid that hit the Earth at the end of the Cretaceous, 65 million years ago, killing the dinosaurs and about two-thirds of species alive at the time.
This implies that some humans would survive, eventually to repopulate the planet, and that a species-level extinction of Homo sapiens is unlikely even after a full-scale nuclear war. But the vast majority of the human population would suffer extremely unpleasant deaths from burns, radiation and starvation, and human civilization would likely collapse entirely. Survivors would eke out a living on a devastated, barren planet.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Hard to judge that woman. She didn't help Russians take the city. The city fell long ago. What is she supposed to do now? Throw a Molotov at nearby tank and get killed on the spot. Remaining citizens need some kind of mayor to somewhat restore life. If she's genuinely trying to do it, what's wrong?
We're obviously very happy she's back in Poland with me, along with her best friend and cousin. However just because they are here doesn't mean the horrors that come along with this war have ended. The friend's Mother already lives in Poland, so she is going to move in with her later today (Father still in Ukraine as he is of fighting age and cannot leave). Cousin will be staying with us for 7 weeks before we move to Canada.
My wife and her cousin are very worried about their parents. Their food supply has dwindled. Still no power, heat, internet and food supply. A couple days ago a very small food supply made it to the village. Yesterday some Russian "aid" arrived in the form of medication.
Today the cousin's friend called (from this same village) and said that there is a plan for Russian "aid" to bring food to their village. Along with that comes a TV camera crew to showcase how much these brave Russians are "helping" the Ukrainians AND a possible evacuation order. Except that evacuation order goes directly to Belgorod , on the Russian side. From what we understood, women and children have the choice to either stay or evacuate. But all males in the village MUST evacuate to Belgorod. With all that is happening with Putin recruiting "volunteers" , we have a legitimate worry that my FIL will be forced to fight for the Russian side. I am not sure of the logistics of how that will work, if it is feasible or not, and how the Russians go about making sure this happens. Apparently it's happened quite a bit in the Donbas region. Will try to confirm later if this is actually happening and obviously something we worry very much about.
I'm happy my wife is back and safe. But she is a complete mess about this. Having to leave her parents behind, she feels extremely guilty. For example she hates how she can do normal things like listen to music or drink wine, and her family is starving and sleep deprived. It's hard with how communication with them is very sporadic. How her home city of Kharkov is a pile of rubble. How she thinks and dreams of bombs throughout the day and night. It has been extremely hard on her. Trying my best to keep her spirits up but there is going to be an extremely challenging recovery process in all of this.
Still makes me so upset that last month they were living normal lives with the threat of war looming, yet truly believing it would not happen. Then it has shifted to their lives completely turned upside down and her cousin having to start a new life here in Poland by herself while we move to Canada. Breaks my heart to know this was forced upon her. My wife feels very guilty that she is 'abandoning' her.
I'll be looking into the new program that IRCC is supposed to be releasing in the next week or 2 that supposedly makes it easier for Ukrainians to come to Canada. But knowing how my dealings with IRCC have gone on over the past few years, I am not holding hope that it will be anything other than IRCC doing what it does best and picking and choosing a select few lucky ones who meet an extremely high criteria for admission. I believe the cousin's best chance at starting a new life will be here in Poland due to the location and similarities in language and culture. We will be doing what we can now to help her cousin integrate into Poland with the social programs they have ongoing. Helping her get set up with bank accounts, the city layout, job searches, accommodation searches, etc.
So while I am happy my wife and her companions are safe, this war still brings many challenges for them long after they have made it to safety. Obligatory #### Putin and his cronies, and praying this war ends as soon as possible.
Last edited by Huntingwhale; 03-13-2022 at 04:36 AM.
The Following 57 Users Say Thank You to Huntingwhale For This Useful Post:
Browsing through YouTube for military analysis and that seems to be the consensus. The longest estimate I heard was two weeks before Kyiv falls. It seems to be a foregone conclusion by the “experts”.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
2-3 days seems unlikely to me. They aren't even fighting in the city much yet.
I doubt Russia takes Kyiv at all. I don't think they have the manpower and would have to cross a great deal of open terrain inside current Ukrainian lines. Zelensky visited a hospital today, which gives me optimism that the situation is pretty stable.
Here's a 16 vehicle Russian convoy destroyed beyond recognition today.
I see the argument. If the city is getting destroyed and people are dying - you can see people deciding to just end the suffering however they can. Now obviously - you just become a Russian propaganda prop in this case - but may not be evil intentions.
The Following User Says Thank You to PeteMoss For This Useful Post:
Any chance Putin gets frustrated and drops a nuke or two on kviv or another Ukrainian city just to drop the hammer and end this resistance? I can’t see that triggering any sort of nuclear retaliation.
