JFABNRGR said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

What am I looking at?

---

Nasty stuff. Explodes in air and rains molten death burning everything it touches. In Vietnam famously called willy pete for white phosphorus. I forgot what this the new stuff is but someone will add.

Edit update. I thought there was a newer name for this but apparently its still white phosphorus. Burns like 4000 degrees. You dont want to be around it.

---

Iirc it keeps burning without need for an oxidiszer…i.e. under water…i.e inside your ass.

JFABNRGR said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

What am I looking at?

---

Nasty stuff. Explodes in air and rains molten death burning everything it touches. In Vietnam famously called willy pete for white phosphorus. I forgot what this the new stuff is but someone will add.

Edit update. I thought there was a newer name for this but apparently its still white phosphorus. Burns like 4000 degrees. You dont want to be around it.

---

You were probably thinking of the change in terminology from FAE bombs to thermobaric weapons. That got talked about a lot early in the war when the Russians started using WP and people were confusing the thermobaric weapons with WP.

cbr said:

---

JFABNRGR said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

What am I looking at?

---

Nasty stuff. Explodes in air and rains molten death burning everything it touches. In Vietnam famously called willy pete for white phosphorus. I forgot what this the new stuff is but someone will add.

Edit update. I thought there was a newer name for this but apparently its still white phosphorus. Burns like 4000 degrees. You dont want to be around it.

---

Iirc it keeps burning without need for an oxidiszer…i.e. under water…i.e inside your ass.

---

Are you sure WP burns under water? I guess maybe it will keep burning if submerged, but it generally will not autoignite under water. We were dealing with some potential WP UXO munitions in a lake and our techs could not surface them to complete their ID for fear of autoignition when exposed to the air. So they had to do all their ID by feel instead of visually because the water about a 6" visibility.

Quote:

---

i.e. under water…i.e inside your ass.

---

That is illegal under Geneva Conventions, right?

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

i.e. under water…i.e inside your ass.

---

That is illegal under Geneva Conventions, right?

---

Gray area IIRC. If it is used for illumination flares or smoke generation, I think it is legal, but if it is deliberately used to start fires, burn troops/civilians, etc. I think it is illegal under GC.

Fighter jets and long-range missiles were discussed during Biden and Zelensky’s meeting earlier today and “no red lines were drawn”, CNN reports.

— Apex (@Apex_WW) February 20, 2023

JFABNRGR said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

What am I looking at?

---

Nasty stuff. Explodes in air and rains molten death burning everything it touches. In Vietnam famously called willy pete for white phosphorus. I forgot what this the new stuff is but someone will add.

Edit update. I thought there was a newer name for this but apparently its still white phosphorus. Burns like 4000 degrees. You dont want to be around it.

---

Scariest stuff I ever saw in the Army (except maybe flechet rounds fired from 105 mm field guns. They had thousands of flechets that looked like 10 penny finish nails, that had fins stamped on them, instead of a head).

Nothing wrong with using it as smoke or a mark or against troops or equipment. Not ok against civilians but Russia clearly doesn't give a crap about that.

GAC06 said:

---

Nothing wrong with using it as smoke or a mark or against troops or equipment. Not ok against civilians but Russia clearly doesn't give a crap about that.

---

It can be used on "suspected" <ahem> enemy positions?

Simple question: Is Ukraine using those as much, if at all?

aggiehawg said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Nothing wrong with using it as smoke or a mark or against troops or equipment. Not ok against civilians but Russia clearly doesn't give a crap about that.

---

It can be used on "suspected" <ahem> enemy positions?

Simple question: Is Ukraine using those as much, if at all?

---

I don't think I've seen it. I suppose they could, but to what end, really?

The British and Dutch Navy have stepped up Naval Patrols of the North Sea in recent months to try and prevent any Sabotage Attempts.

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) February 20, 2023

aggiehawg said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Nothing wrong with using it as smoke or a mark or against troops or equipment. Not ok against civilians but Russia clearly doesn't give a crap about that.

---

It can be used on "suspected" <ahem> enemy positions?

Simple question: Is Ukraine using those as much, if at all?

---

Sure. Let's be honest it's not like someone will enforce the Geneva conventions

Drill down of Bakhmut. AFU is prepping to withdraw, but within 4 days temps will climb and the muddy season will begin and stay until April.

Possible that Russian advances will stall and Bakhmut holds.

If the muddy season is about to start, why the talk of a major Russian offensive ? A year ago, Russian supply routes became trapped on highways

sclaff said:

---

Drill down of Bakhmut. AFU is prepping to withdraw, but within 4 days temps will climb and the muddy season will begin and stay until April.

Possible that Russian advances will stall and Bakhmut holds.

If the muddy season is about to start, why the talk of a major Russian offensive ? A year ago, Russian supply routes became trapped on highways

---

If there is a massive invasion, do they need to roll their tanks now before it warms up?

Another SITREP.

I'm convinced the Russians used their geneva conv. documents as TP when they ran out one day shortly after signing.

GAC06 said:

---

Nothing wrong with using it as smoke or a mark or against troops or equipment. Not ok against civilians but Russia clearly doesn't give a crap about that.

---

For a good discussion of the legalities of WP weapons, check out this article from 2019, when Turkey was reported to have used WP against Kurdish rebels.

Legally, WP is neither an incendiary weapon (designed with the primary intent to start fires and/or burn people and things) nor a chemical weapon.

The Law of Armed Conflict does not outright ban the use of incendiary weapons, even if WP were so classified. Incendiaries can be used, subject to the following rules:

Quote:

---

Article 2, titled "Protection of civilians and civilian objects," prohibits four uses of incendiary weapons:
- Making civilian or civilian objects the object of attack by incendiary weapons.
- Attacking a military objective located within a concentration of civilians with air-delivered incendiary weapons.
- Attacking a military objective located within a concentration of civilians with a non-air-delivered incendiary weapon, except when such military objective is clearly separated from the concentration of civilians and all feasible precautions are taken to minimize collateral damage.
- Making forests or other kinds of plant cover the object of attack by incendiary weapons except when such natural elements are used to cover, conceal or camouflage combatants or other military objectives.

---

The use of WP as a weapon goes back at least as far as WWII. See this photo of WP munitions being used against a Japanese airfield on Rabaul or this one of aerial WP munitions being used against a flight of B-24s.

A View from Talinn

Quote:

---

Could it all go south and get worse? Sure can.
Will it all go south and get worse if the West were to leave Ukraine to its fate?
Unquestionably.
Regardless of what cards come out of the deck, it is better for Ukrainians to fight for Ukrainian independence east of the Dnieper, than for an American-Polish force to try to hold the line at the Vistula long enough for a German-British-Franco led force to set a second line at the Oder.

---

txags92 said:

---

cbr said:

---

JFABNRGR said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

What am I looking at?

---

Nasty stuff. Explodes in air and rains molten death burning everything it touches. In Vietnam famously called willy pete for white phosphorus. I forgot what this the new stuff is but someone will add.

Edit update. I thought there was a newer name for this but apparently its still white phosphorus. Burns like 4000 degrees. You dont want to be around it.

---

Iirc it keeps burning without need for an oxidiszer…i.e. under water…i.e inside your ass.

---

Are you sure WP burns under water? I guess maybe it will keep burning if submerged, but it generally will not autoignite under water. We were dealing with some potential WP UXO munitions in a lake and our techs could not surface them to complete their ID for fear of autoignition when exposed to the air. So they had to do all their ID by feel instead of visually because the water about a 6" visibility.

---

I recalled that it did but was wrong. It does require an oxygen source, but it burns so hot and persistently once it gets going it does a lot of damage and has to be totally starved of oxygen to put it out - and even then it can reignite if exposed to oxygen again. and in the body it also is poisonous, just nasty stuff.

Biden going to ukraine!?
News reports that we blew up nordsteam
M1's supposedly to ukraine along with other aid
Putin's latest speech focussed on war w the west and 'existential' conflict
Xi planning trip to russia

The optics are lining up for a huge escalation.

China providing Russia with arms is the most problematic.

The way this is going, Russia is performing poorly and running through it's munitions at an unsustainable rate. Russia has the manpower for attrition but it won't have the armament to do so. China changes that equation.

Smeghead4761 said:

---

Very interesting article, strategic level, from Laughing Wolf: https://www.laughingwolf.net/2023/02/17/peace-at-any-price/

Quote:

---

Therein lies the problem. Outside opinions and even responses do not matter to the large majority of the population of the Russian Federation. At best, such are seen as bigotry and an attack. At worst, they were not even a consideration. That holds true for the leadership as well. For all intents and purposes, the people of the Russian Federation live in a bubble, and the upper leadership lives in an even more dense and impenetrable bubble.

---

BLUF: Russia isn't going to stop until they are beat down and unable to continue. And, IMHO, even if the Russians are economically, and possibly literally, starved into saying "Uncle," the best you're going to get is a Versailles type armistice, with the Russians working as hard as they can to subvert it and attack again in a generation or two.

For the Ukraine, this is, obviously, a war of national existence. The Russians, unfortunately, largely view it the same say, that Ukraine is part of the Russkiy Mir, rightfully belonging to Russia.

When both sides view a war as existential, the war won't end until one side is crushed beyond the ability to resist.

Even if Ukraine were to succeed in recapturing Crimea, Donbas, and driving the Russians totally back to the pre-2014 borders, the best they'll get is a cease fire, with Round II coming as soon as Russian feels like they have a chance to win.

---

for the Ukrainians, even the dire situation you claim is an improvement

because it means they have a few years to purchase advanced Western fighters and bombers, improve their SAM and counter-drone defenses, harden their infrastructure, and draft another few years worth of young men

every day that Ukraine stays free is a day they will get stronger and Russia weaker.

China has used intellectual property theft of western technologies and commercial purchases of the same to upgrade a good portion of their front line combat forces with more modern designs. In doing so, the've created a new generation of their own domestic designs that only partly retain any commonality with the older Soviet Era copies they used to buy and make.

This means that their newer gear may not be backwards compatible with Russian ammunition and logistics, while their older second line stuff is probably pretty crappy as well, on par with older Russian equipment.

What China can do is churn out ammunition and infantry equipment in large volume and send it in trains straight to western Russia.

Edit

Saber rattling again. Russia loves to remind us they have a large strategic nuclear arsenal. It's a big matter of personal and national pride for them. They can't afford to expand it, even if they want to.

DefMon update (ongoing, so no threadreaderapp link yet):

Ukraine update🧵 February 21th

It would be helpful if you like and retweet this tweet. pic.twitter.com/YcfE33ETSS

— Def Mon (@DefMon3) February 21, 2023

UPDATE
BELARUS

This comes after the Moldovan Prime Minister stated he has heard the same thing.

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) February 21, 2023

If they do, I wonder how they'll just it this time

Not a Bot said:

---

This comes after the Moldovan Prime Minister stated he has heard the same thing.

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) February 21, 2023

---

Unless Moldova has zero military, I don't see how an operation like that is going to end in success. (For Russia)

They did it to the Czechs in 1968. Moldova had a military, but it is not much. They're much smaller than Ukraine and not nearly as well armed.

rgag12 said:

---

Not a Bot said:

---

This comes after the Moldovan Prime Minister stated he has heard the same thing.

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) February 21, 2023

---

Unless Moldova has zero military, I don't see how an operation like that is going to end in success. (For Russia)

---

Essentially no airforce.

Less than 6k men in their army.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Forces_of_the_Republic_of_Moldova

If Russia could land airborne troops and follow with a seaborn invasion force and launch an offensive from Crimea in a pencher movement, Odessa would not be fun.

The idea of a seaborne invasion was put to bed by sinking their cruiser I'd think. Now if they had taken Odessa it would seem likely to continue west