#2018 drone strike

[thoughtlessarse]

The American military has been carrying out a continuous military campaign in Somalia since the 2000s, launching nearly 300 drone strikes and commando raids over the past 17 years. In one April 2018 air attack, American troops killed three, and possibly five, civilians with a pair of missiles. A woman and child were among the dead, according to a U.S. military investigation, but the same report concluded their identities might never be known. Last year, my investigation for The Intercept exposed the details of this disastrous attack. The woman and child survived the initial strike but were killed by the second missile. They were 22-year-old Luul Dahir Mohamed and her 4-year-old daughter, Mariam Shilow Muse. For six years, the family has tried to contact the U.S. government, including through an online civilian casualty reporting portal run by U.S. Africa Command, or AFRICOM, but they have never received a response. “They know innocent people were killed, but they’ve never told us a reason or apologized,” Abdi Dahir Mohamed, one of Luul’s brothers, told me last year. “No one has been held accountable.” A new report by the Center for Civilians in Conflict, or CIVIC, shared exclusively with The Intercept, underlines what Mohamed told me: Civilian victims and survivors of U.S. drone strikes in Somalia say that attaining justice in the form of official acknowledgment, apologies, and financial compensation would help them move on from the trauma they experienced. But after almost 20 years of drone strikes, even in cases in which the Pentagon has admitted to killing innocent people, the U.S. has failed to apologize to any Somali survivors, much less offer amends. “The civilians we interviewed described not only devastating physical harm, like deaths and injuries, but also significant economic burdens and long-lasting psychological trauma,” Madison Hunke, CIVIC’s U.S. program officer, told The Intercept. “Most respondents agreed that justice comes down to a perpetrator of harm being held accountable for their actions and the victims being treated with the dignity they deserve.”

continue reading

[matan4il]

Update post:

Most of this will be about the unprecedented attack of the Islamist regime of Iran against Israel, but first I have to take a second to mourn a 14 year old boy, who was murdered in a Palestinian attack on Friday. At around 6 in the morning, teenager Binyamin Achimeir led his sheep herd out of the farm he lives in, but a few hours later, the sheep returned to the farm without him. At first, it was feared that he had some accident, or was dehydrated, and thousands of people voluntarily joined the search for him. On Saturday, at around noon, the IDF found his body, with signs of brutal violence on it. Based on the forensic evidence, he was murdered by several Palestinian terrorists, and he fought back. The army is still hunting down the murderers. May Binyamin's memory be a blessing.

Right, back to the Islamist regime of Iran's attack on Israel. I posted about it as soon as the news started being aired here, in case someone didn't know about it. The news broke past the normal time when people watch news on TV in Israel, I noticed it by chance right before I was about to turn in for the night. I'm physically okay, but I didn't get that much sleep, I had to wake up early to take care of some stuff, so I AM very tired, which is why I'm not going to do the usual thing I do, which is to look for English journalistic sources for everything, but I have no doubt even the stuff I won't look up can all be easily found online.

On a personal note, I can tell you that at 1:43 in the morning I heard the first explosion, but no sirens went off. A few more explosions followed, and only then did we hear the sirens. It was scary, for a moment we couldn't tell whether we're hearing explosions of missiles from neighboring areas, or whether something went wrong with the sirens, and we need to hurry into the bomb shelter. It seems like in Jerusalem specifically there was some issue with the sirens, I heard a reporter mention it. Also, the alert app didn't go off, even though it should have, at the latest when the sirens did.

This is what the Temple Mount looked like from an Iranian attack that could have easily destroyed the al-Aqsa mosque (it's not in the frame, but it's right next to where this was filmed):

Quick background: Iran is the biggest financier of anti-Israel terrorism for decades now, including funding Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis, all of which have been a part of a continuous attack on Israel since Oct 7 as Iran's proxies. Iran has sent its own military seniors to help and instruct those local terrorists, in places like Lebanon, Syria and Iraq. Israel has eliminated them whenever possible, this is not something new. On Apr 1, Israel carried out such a strike, in which it targeted 7 Iranian army seniors in Damascus, Syria's capital. Iran claimed Israel targeted the Iranian consulate in this city, but diplomatic buildings are all publicly listed. Iran has an embassy in Damascus (in a separate location) and no consulates. That's why the magnitude of Iran's response to this has taken Israel by surprise, because the Israeli strike wasn't that out of the ordinary. In fact, the US assassination of Iran's military commander, Qasem Soleimani, back in 2018, was a far graver blow for the Iranian regime, and yet it did not lead to an attack as massive as the one launched against Israel last night.

It is now known that some of the attack waves against Israel were intercepted by other countries, including The US, the UK, France and Jordan. It's been said that there's at least one more Arab country that helped in intercepting Iran's attack, but it can't be publicized. Many countries denounced Iran for attacking Israel.

We don't have numbers regarding the full size of the attack. Out of all the countries who participated in curtailing this attack, we know that the US has intercepted at least 70 suicide drones and 3 cruise missiles, while Israel has intercepted at least 185 suicide drones, 36 cruise missile and 110 ballistic missiles (that last one is the missile type that causes the most damage). Israel's interceptions are said to have been 99% successful, but like I said, no defence system is perfect. A small number of ballistic missiles did land inside Israel. One hit an Israeli air Force base in the south. There's over 30 people who got injured when rushing to the bomb shelter in the middle of the night (elderly people, including Holocaust survivors, have died from such injuries), and over 30 more ended up in hospital due to severe mental health reactions. On top of that, there's a 7 years old Muslim Bedouine girl who was injured by interceptors debris. A friend of her family that I heard being interviewed said the family wanted to go to the communal bomb shelter, but before they even had a chance to make it out of the house, the girl was hit by the debris piercing into their home, and she is suffering from severe head injuries. The hospital is currently fighting for her life.

The estimate of how much it cost Israel to defend its citizens from this one attack last night is 5 BILLION shekels (which is over 1.3 BILLION US dollars). That's for one night.

Israel will respond. According to one reporter I heard, that was decided as soon as it was clear how big the attack is, so this isn't about how much damage Iran caused, it's about how it crossed several red lines. This is the first time Iran itself attacked Israel itself, it's not an attack on an extension of Israel, nor was it done by using proxy terrorists. Israel has had terrorist organizations attacking it continuously since 2001, but this is the first attack from a fellow sovereign country since Iraq (led by tyrant Saddam Hussein) in 1991, so that in itself is crossing a red line. The size of the attack is also considered an escalation on Iran's part. In 2019, Iran launched a smaller scaled suicde drone attack on Saudi Arabia, and the latter's western allies refused to launch a counter attack, which led to these countries being seen as unreliable, and some Middle Eastern countries renewed their ties with Iran. That's why how it would seen in the Middle East if Israel doesn't react to an even bigger attack, and how it might drive more moderate countries to grow closer to Iran, is another consideration in why Israel must respond. Not to mention that launching such a mass attack basically caused a paralysis of the country once the first intel became known. For example, all educational activity (schools, universities, you name it) has been canceled, Israel's air space had to be closed, every single ambulance across the country had to be manned, and so on. That is not something any country can simply shrug off. Not to mention, Israel financially can't afford this reality to become normalized.

Not to mention, Israel tried to contain Hamas, PIJ and Hezbollah's rocket attacks for decades. What we got for it was the invasion and massacre on Oct 7. The lesson for most Israelis is that containing mass attacks on our population only leads to worse ones.

That said, there's also no desire here of getting dragged into a war on another front while we're still in the middle of one in Gaza and with Iran's proxies on several more fronts. So, Israel is looking for a balanced response, one that won't let this mass attack slide, but hopefully doesn't make matters much worse.

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

[tomorrowusa]

Ukrainian drones blew up a large Russian arms depot west of Moscow. The blast was large enough to have been detected by earthquake sensors.

A Ukrainian drone attack on a large Russian weapons depot caused a blast that was picked up by earthquake monitoring stations, in one of the biggest strikes on Moscow’s military arsenal since the war began. Pro-Russian military bloggers said Ukraine struck an arsenal for the storage of missiles, ammunition and explosives in Toropets, a historic town more than 300 miles north of Ukraine and about 230 miles west of Moscow. Videos and images on social media showed a huge ball of flame rising high into the night sky and detonations thundering across a lake, in a region not far from the border with Belarus. The strike was part of a broader Ukrainian drone campaign targeting Russian oil refineries, power plants, airfields and military factories, and highlights Kyiv’s enhanced long-range drone capabilities. Earthquake monitoring stations registered what sensors thought was a minor earthquake in the area.

The blast was so big that in the first couple of seconds it appears to be during daytime.

The Kyiv Independent has additional details.

Arms depot in Russia's Tver Oblast built to withstand nuclear explosion heavily damaged by Ukrainian drones

Back in 2018, the Russian Defense Ministry bragged that this facility would be prepared to withstand even a nuclear explosion. Six years later, the claim was proven to be false. According to the SBU, the arsenal stored ballistic missiles, including Iskanders, anti-aircraft missiles, artillery ammunition, and KAB guided bombs. The attack "literally wiped off the face of the earth a large warehouse of the main missile and artillery department of the Russian Defense Ministry," the SBU source said. The construction of the arsenal, controlled by the Main Missile and Artillery Directorate, began in 2015 in the town of Toropets, located 480 kilometers north of Ukraine. The construction was part of a 2012 government program set to improve Russia's storage of missiles, ammunition, and explosives. According to Russia's Defense Ministry, the program, worth 90 billion rubles (nearly $980 million), called for 13 modern arms depots to be built. [ ... ] Yet the source in the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) told the Kyiv Independent that a "very powerful detonation" occurred, and the affected area was 6 kilometers (3.7 miles) wide. NASA satellites also recorded a surge in thermal activity in Tver Oblast, where the 107th arsenal of the Main Missile and Artillery Directorate is located. "The arsenal seems to have been built correctly, with bunkered storage facilities that can hold up to 240 tons of ammunition each," Serhiy Zgurets, military expert and CEO of the Ukrainian media Defense Express, told the Kyiv Independent.

As Joe Biden might put it, this is "a big fucking deal". Months worth of ammunition, missiles, and other ordnance which was waiting to be used against Ukrainians has been eliminated.

In total, about 30,000 tons of ammunition were stored in the arsenal in Toropets, which could have been enough to conduct attacks for months, according to the expert. Russia most likely stored 122 mm Grad ammunition, 82 mm mines, and missiles for Buk medium-range surface-to-air missile systems, among other munitions, according to Zgurets.

Ukraine apparently destroyed 30,000 tons (i.e. 30 kilotons) of ammo. For comparison, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima was the equivalent of 15 kilotons.

Ukrainians are intelligent and resourceful. They are now building drones which cannot be jammed by electronic warfare. They may have used those to get to Toropets.

And it seems a bit weird that Russia would build a gigantic arsenal just 4.51 km (less than 3 miles) from downtown Toropets – a scenic town and local administrative center.

So Ukraine has now penetrated and destroyed an impenetrable arms depot. Previously, Ukraine has stopped unstoppable Kinzhal Russian missiles. This war is unwinnable for Russia but the country continues to humiliate itself with its unmistakable military ineptitude.

[mariacallous]

Iran’s national security doctrine is rooted in the painful legacy of the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War. That conflict was marked by Iran’s international isolation, Iraq’s use of chemical weapons against Iranian troops and cities, and devastating shortages of military supplies. These experiences laid the groundwork for Iran’s “forward defense” strategy, built around three pillars: ballistic missiles and drones; support for regional nonstate actors; and a threshold nuclear capability. Each element of this strategy is designed to address vulnerabilities exposed during that war. However, the Israel-Hamas war has demonstrated the vulnerability of this strategy.

Recent Israeli operations against Iranian proxies, attacks within Iran’s own borders, and growing domestic calls to rethink its nuclear stance have presented Tehran with critical choices about the nuclear program’s strategic role. In recent months, two of the three pillars of Iran’s forward defense approach have been weakened in the face of Israelis’ demonstrable escalation dominance. Now the nuclear program is the only intact pillar, but the situation puts Tehran in a bind: Should it decide to cross the nuclear threshold, it could trigger a war with the United States and Israel.

Ballistic missiles have constituted the backbone of Iran’s national defense capability. Reliance on ballistic missiles finds its roots in the Iran-Iraq War, when Iranian cities were subjected to Iraq’s widespread use of missiles. “Tehran was burning every night under [Iraq’s] missiles. … We didn’t have missiles—we had nothing to defend ourselves with,” Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, observed in 2018 about the war. That experience led Iranians to invest heavily in expanding missile production capacity, ultimately developing the largest ballistic missile arsenal in the region, with a variety of short-range and medium-range missiles—especially important in the absence of a modern air force capable of projecting Iran’s power in the region.

This year, Israel has in effect destroyed Iran’s most advanced air defense systems received from Russia in 2016. Following the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, and the subsequent outbreak of the Gaza conflict, Iran launched hundreds of ballistic and cruise missiles at Israeli targets in two separate attacks. While the first attack in April was largely defeated, the second missile attack on Oct. 1 was far more effective, with several ballistic missiles successfully bypassing Israel’s layered missile defense system, hitting the Nevatim air base.

Israel’s Oct. 26 response to Iran’s attack was far more effective than its previous response on April 19, which destroyed an S-300 radar at Isfahan’s 8th Tactical Air Base. The recent strikes marked the largest attack on the Iranian territory since the Iran-Iraq War. Reports indicate that the Israeli Air Force, using Iraqi airspace, launched attacks against missile production facilities and S-300 air defenses that protected critical oil and petrochemical refineries, as well as systems guarding a large gas field in Iran. These attacks have left Iran’s critical infrastructure extremely vulnerable to future strikes. As an unnamed Iranian source familiar with the country’s air defenses highlighted to me, “Iran’s air space is wide open like a highway.”

The October attack, which killed at least four Iranian army personnel, was initially played down by Iranian officials. However, the rhetoric slowly began to change, with senior Iranian officials vowing that Iran will “use all available tools to deliver a definite and effective response.” Iran now faces a difficult choice: It must carefully weigh the risks of retaliating against Israel against the possibility of it escalating into a broader and potentially devastating conflict.

Iran’s strategic isolation and lack of regional allies have profoundly shaped its national defense doctrine. Addressing Iran’s loneliness in the region, President Masoud Pezeshkian said in September, “I am the president of a country that has repeatedly faced threats, wars, and occupations. No one has ever come to our aid, and our declarations of neutrality have been ignored.” In the absence of powerful state allies, Iran has turned to nonstate actors to project its power and conduct proxy warfare beyond its borders to defend the homeland. These proxy forces, which form the second pillar of Iran’s national defense, are intended to limit the operational freedom of its regional adversaries and impose costs on Iran’s adversaries. In February, Amir Saeid Iravani, Iran’s envoy to the United Nations, compared Tehran’s relationship with what he called “resistance groups” to the NATO alliance. Essentially, these proxies bolster Iran’s security by providing an asymmetrical deterrent against the superior conventional forces of Saudi Arabia and Israel. However, growing pressure on its so-called Axis of Resistance forces has put Iran in a difficult position.

Iran now faces a critical choice: to back its allies, risking direct confrontation with Israel—a scenario referred to as chain-ganging—or to remain on the sidelines, potentially leaving its regional partners to fend for themselves. However, this would be contrary to the primary purpose of these forces—that is, to keep Iran out of a fight. The assassination of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran along with the subsequent pager attacks and deaths of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and, most recently, Haniyeh’s successor, Yahya Sinwar, have deprived these forces of some of their most experienced leaders. Additionally, Israeli operations in southern Lebanon have severely weakened Hezbollah, which functions as Iran’s queen on the regional geopolitical chessboard. Reports indicate that Hezbollah’s military, which defeated Israel in the 2006 war, has been severely degraded, though not destroyed.

Should Iran abandon its allies, it risks damaging its credibility abroad, with the effect of a potentially deteriorating security environment for itself. This may explain why, on Oct. 4, Khamenei, in a rare move, delivered the Friday sermon, pledging in Arabic continued support for the Axis of Resistance and reaffirming Iran’s commitment to the Palestinian cause. Either scenario is risky for Iran.

In response to these external developments, since early 2024 Iranian officials have shifted their discourse around the issue of nuclear weaponization. In February, Ali Akbar Salehi, the former head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, likened Iran’s nuclear capability to assembling a car: “Imagine what a car needs—it requires a chassis, an engine, a steering wheel, a gearbox. You’re asking if we’ve made the gearbox; I say yes. Have we made the engine? Yes, but each component has its own function.” While this analogy underscores Iran’s technical readiness, previously taboo discussions about weaponization have become more explicit amid changing regional dynamics.

In October, 39 Iranian parliament members sent a letter to the Supreme National Security Council urging a reassessment of Iran’s defense doctrine regarding nuclear weapons. Adding to the escalating rhetoric, Kamal Kharazi, a former foreign minister and current advisor to Khamenei, warned that Iran’s nuclear stance could shift. “We now have the technical capabilities necessary to produce nuclear weapons. … Only the supreme leader’s fatwa [against nuclear weapons] currently prohibits it,” he cautioned in early November. “If the survival of Iran comes under serious threat, we reserve the right to reconsider.” The current debate over Iran’s defense posture may genuinely stem from heightened security concerns amid regional threats, but it could also be a strategic ploy by Iranians to pressure the United States into restraining Israel’s aggressive actions. After all, Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghch reiterated last week that Iran does not seek nuclear weapons.

Crossing the nuclear threshold would, in theory, give Iran the ultimate tool of deterrence, enhancing its regional influence. It could further enable Iran to match Israel’s nuclear arsenal in the region. This path is fraught with danger, though, as it risks provoking a potential conflict with the United States and Israel. Iran’s nuclear breakout time is currently estimated at one to two weeks, but if Tehran opts to dash for a bomb, it would likely need several months to a year to produce a usable nuclear weapon. During this period of vulnerability, Iran would be highly exposed to preventive strikes, particularly from the United States or Israel. Several U.S. presidents, both Democratic and Republican, have stated that the use of the military to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons is on the table. Given Iran’s past intelligence lapses, any covert attempt to rapidly develop a bomb would likely be detected, prompting swift military intervention. In essence, any covert attempt at weaponization could be seen as an open invitation for foreign intervention, which could dissuade Iran from fully crossing the nuclear finish line. This scenario mirrors the decision Iran made in 2003, when fears of a U.S. invasion prompted it to halt its clandestine nuclear activities.

Iran is currently facing a predicament over its most prized national achievement: nuclear threshold status. While domestic pressure to develop a nuclear weapon is ostensibly growing, this move remains unlikely due to the considerable risks associated with weaponization. Furthermore, while Hezbollah’s leadership has been decapitated and its military strength has been weakened, it is not nearly close to a collapse. In the absence of a nuclear agreement to limit its program, the most plausible scenario is that Iran will continue edging closer to nuclear capability without fully crossing the threshold. This approach allows Iran to avoid preventive strikes while reducing the time required to assemble a weapon if an existential threat emerges, as only an acute security threat would likely push Iran to take the final step toward nuclear weapons. Such a crisis would include an attack on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure or the total collapse of Hezbollah.

[littlepawz]

The 2018 Drone Awards featured a beautiful shot, titled “Water Lily” by Le Duong featuring Vietnamese women at work in the country. The photograph was taken in Mekong, Vietnam.

The water lily season of the Mekong Delta lasts only a few months in the fall, but provides striking colour contrasts for photographs.

[yanderes-galore]

Fandoms

All the fandoms I'm doing and taking a break from. Always up to date, check often :)

Last Edited: 11/4/24

Bold -> Written Before

Not Bold -> Hasn't been written before.

Adventure Time

🔪Fandoms I am currently writing for🔪

A

Arcane

Alien vs Predator (Just Alien movies or Predator movies are also included. Also books and games.)

Apex Legends

Arknights

Assassin's Creed (Games)

Assassination Classroom

A Song of Ice and Fire/House of The Dragon/Game of Thrones

Black Clover

Attack on Titan

B

Beastars (Season 1 + 2 of the anime)

Bendy and the Ink Machine

Bioshock (All games)

Black Butler

Blue Exorcist

The Boys

Borderlands (Including 1, 2, Pre-sequel, and 3)

Carmen Sandiego (Netflix show)

Bungou Stray Dogs

C

Call of Duty

Cookie Run

Creepypasta/Gaming Creepypasta (Not everyone, it depends)

Cult of The Lamb

Cuphead (Game/Show)

Danganronpa (Games only)

Cyberpunk 2077 (Anime/Game)

D

Dark Deception

Dark Souls/Souls-Like games

Dauntless (Creatures will all be pet-like)

DC Comics (Comics, Games, Movies) [Injustice and Arkhamverse mainly, but let's discuss]

Dead By Daylight (All Survivors and Killers along with costumes)

Dead Space (1-3)

Deltarune (Both Chapters)

Death Note

Demon Slayer

The Devil is a Part-Timer!

Detroit: Become Human

Ducktales 2017

Devil May Cry

Disney Mirrorverse

Don’t Starve (All Survivors and Costumes)

DOOM

Fire Force

Dying Light (1 + 2)

E

Evil Within (1 + 2)

Evolve (Creatures will all be pet-like)

F

Fallout (New Vegas 3, 4)

Far Cry

Fear and Hunger

Final Fantasy (Primarily anything past 7)

Five Nights at Freddy’s (All Games, Books, Fluffy AU) (Animatronic or Android)

Friday Night Funkin (Base game)(?)

G

Gears/Gears of War (Yandere Fics)

Genshin Impact

God of War

Halo RvB/Red vs Blue (All seasons)

Gravity Falls

H

Halo (Reach, CE, 2, 3, 3 ODST, 4, 5, Infinite, Wars 1+2)

Halo Books (Fall of Reach, The Flood, Contact Harvest, The Cole Protocol, First Strike, Ghosts of Onyx, Cryptum, Broken Circle, Hunters In The Dark, Last Light, New Blood, Envoy, Retribution, Smoke and Shadow, Bad Blood, Renegade, Point of Light, Divine Wind)

Happy Tree Friends (Anthro Animals or Hybrids/Humans [Like my OCs])

Haikyu!

Hazbin Hotel/Helluva Boss

Hiveswap

Hollow Knight

Homestuck

Honkai Impact

How To Train Your Dragon

I

Identity V (All Survivors/Killers and their costumes except Hastur and younger characters are depicted as Platonic)

Monkie Kid (Lego)

Invader Zim (Original series and Enter the Florpus)

J

Jujutsu Kaisen

L

The Last of Us

League of Legends

Left 4 Dead (1 and 2)

Legend of Zelda

Lobotomy Corporation

M

Madness Combat (Game and Series)

Mario Franchise

Marvel Cinematic Universe (Up to Endgame)/Marvel Comic Universe (SPECIFY WHAT COMIC PLEASE-)

Metroid

Metal Gear Solid (All games, although I like Revengeance the most)

My Hero Academia

Mortal Kombat (9 through 11)

Murder Drones

My Little Pony (FiM and a New Generation)

Naruto

Mystic Messenger

N

Ninjago

Noragami

No More Heroes

One Piece

No Straight Roads

O

Obey Me!

OFF

One Punch Man

Pirates of the Caribbean

Outlast

The Outer Worlds

Overwatch (All characters/Costumes)

P

Payday 2/3

Persona (3-5)

Pokemon (Just Trainers Right Now) (All games)

Portal (1 and 2)

Puss in Boots

R

Rainbow Six Siege

Ratchet and Clank

Red Dead Redemption (Mostly 2)

Resident Evil (All Games)

Saiki K

Rick & Morty

S

Spooky Month

SCP (Not everyone, it depends)

Silent Hill

Skyrim

Slashers/Horror in general (Please say what movie your slasher is from)

Solar Opposites

Sonic (All games + The Paramount Movies + IDW Comics. All characters are aged up except characters Classic! Tails, Movie! Tails, Cream the Rabbit, Ray the Flying Squirrel, and Classic Amy, which are Platonic as I can't see them as aged up.)

Splatoon (Manga/Games)

Star Wars (Movies + Clone Wars)

Steven Universe

Terminator (All movies)

Street Fighter

T

Team Fortress 2 (All Classes and characters like Miss Pauling and Saxton Hale)

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Media (2003, 2007 movie, 2012, 2014/Bayverse, 2018/ROTTMNT)

Tokyo Ghoul

Transformers (Animated, Cyberverse, Earthspark, Generation 1, IDW comics, Prime, Robots In Disguise, War for Cybertron)

Toilet Bound Hanako Kun

Twisted Wonderland

U

Ultrakill

Undertale

V

Warframe

Voltron: Legendary Defender

W

Walking Dead

We Happy Few

Wednesday

The Witcher (Show)

X

~~💜~~

Xcom

Y

Yandere OCs I have (Look at this list)

🚫Fandoms I am taking a break from🚫

- South Park (All aged up of course, Show and games)

[randomnoteforfuturereference]

Playing with Frog sibling concepts... as well as their varying degrees of questionableness... as of spring 2018, during which they share company while watching their respective brothers aim for another national title.

_X_

Nursey's sister: Born 1990.

Heir to the family company, with several departments already under her jurisdiction even as she finishes her PhD.

Despite her STEM background, business obligations, and activism/philanthropy, she always finds time for fashion. To the point of attending the Met Gala multiple times as an invited guest and always a crowd favorite.

Avid transhumanist and already has concrete plans for cybernetic installation for herself.

Her version of taking something personal may or may not have included literal drone strikes on US soil.

_X_

Dex's brother: Born 1990.

Recently retired Apache pilot for US Army. Plans to use GI Bill to attend art school.

Bitty’s height and heterochromic. Go-to fashion sense veers between pop punk and scene. Got all the piercings once out of the military and already heavily tattooed beforehand.

Stripped and even done cam work before. Doesn't mind doing it again.

On one hand, out-Shittys Shitty in terms of being super lefty and super outspoken about it (while he was part of the gay-straight alliance is high school, Dex never came out to him). On the other, a 2nd Amendment absolutist. Joined his cousins in forming a JBGC-esque militia that runs security for protests and queer events.

_X_

Chowder's sister: Born 1998.

Undergrad at Stanford though still undecided as to her major. Not a concern to her as she already makes quite a bit of money as an influencer with a bit of crypto on the side.

Somehow fell in the "right" crowd judging by how she manages to be at every major Hollywood/Silicon Valley party. Notorious (including by tabloid outlets from the National Equirer to the Swallow) for having more tea than a Sri Lankan warehouse about West Coast social shenanigans.

Bitty follows her on social but hadn't made the connection that her brother's his teammate until they meet at the 2018 Frozen Four.

Didn't vote in 2016. Proudly detached from sociopolitical current events domestic and abroad because that's "seriously depressing and brings the energy down."

[usafphantom2]

An Israeli F-35 just took down a cruise missile mid-flight

On Thursday, the Israeli Air Force announced the successful downing of an airborne cruise missile by an F-35, marking the first such intercept of this sort for the highly touted stealth fighter. The announcement, which was made via X, formerly Twitter, references the aircraft as “Adir,” which is the Israeli Air Force’s name for the Lockheed Martin fighter, which means “mighty one” in Hebrew.

TAP RELOAD TO VIEW VIDEO ☝️

“In recent days, a cruise missile launched from the southeast toward the airspace of the State of Israel was detected by the control and detection systems of the Air Force. The systems followed the trajectory of the cruise missile and launched fighter jets from the Adir formation, which successfully intercepted it,” according to the Israeli Air Force’s X post.

Thus far, there have been no further details released about the intercept beyond what can be seen in the footage. This video, which appears to have been captured via either the pilot’s helmet-mounted display or the F-35’s electro-optical targeting system, shows the cruise missile in black with visible wings on either side, as well as the heat from its propulsion system – that likely was a turbojet engine.

The cruise missile itself was probably launched from Yemen by Houthi rebels who have been launching missiles and drones at Israeli targets from the country since shortly after the fighting in Gaza started.

This profile and method of propulsion are in keeping with a land-attack cruise missile Houthi forces claim to have developed commonly known as the Quds 3 – which derives its name from Iran’s shadowy Quds Force. In the image below, you can see where the heat signature from the intercepted cruise missile (shown on top) is visible above the rear portion of the missile fuselage, rather than behind it. This corresponds with the placement of the turbojet on the Quds series of missiles. Likewise, the wing shape appears similar to the wings seen in Quds series missiles.

Top: Screen captures from the cruise missile intercept footage. Bottom: Quds 3 Cruise Missile. The red arrows show turbojet placement.

Editor’s Note: Big thanks to John Ridge on X for helping us nail down the correct Quds Missile – our original analysis indicated the Quds 1, but John Ridge pointed out that the range requirements for striking Israel means that the Houthis used a Quds 3 or Quds 4 instead.

The Quds 1 is believed to have been sourced directly from Iran, due in part to the Houthis’ lack of technological capability and industrial capacity, but also because of its aesthetic similarities to Iran’s larger Soumar cruise missile.

The Houthi movement, which currently occupies the capital city of Yemen, maintains increasingly strong ties with Iran prompting concerns among analysts that the group is rapidly becoming a regional proxy for Tehran’s aggressive regime. This would be in keeping with earlier reports that the Hamas attack on Israel that kicked off this ongoing conflict was planned, in part, with assistance from Tehran.

The Israeli F-35, known as the F-35I, is the only nation-specific iteration of the fighter, with a number of custom modifications, including a domestically produced electronic warfare suite, designed specifically for the threat environment of the Middle East and with a particular emphasis on Iran. Israel’s F-35s were the first F-35s to see combat operations, starting in early 2018.

Read more from Sandboxx News

How F-14 and F-15 pilots trained to take down the legendary Blackbird

US announces development of powerful new nuclear bomb

New Space Force painting offers a glimpse of space warfare

America’s new stealth bomber begins taxi tests ahead of first flight

SOCOM’s potential new firearm is a revolution

[warningsine]

https://www.kurdistan24.net/en/story/31642-Turkish-shelling-hits-northern-Aleppo-after-Turkish-base-targeted

ERBIL (Kurdistan 24) – Turkish forces with heavy artillery shelled several villages in northern Aleppo controlled by Kurdish forces and the Syrian government, the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) reported on Sunday.

The Turkish shelling came after Turkish forces in Aleppo’s countryside were targeted by missiles fired from areas under control by Kurdish and Syrian government forces in northern Aleppo.

The missile attack struck two Turkish military bases: the Kaljebrin base and a base near the Bab Al-Salama crossing.

Turkish forces and their proxies fired heavy artillery shells on the vicinity of Tal Rifaat city, Abin, Kashta’ar, Mara’anaz, Tatimrash, Al-Malkiya, Soghanka and Herasha in Sherawa district in the Afrin countryside. The area is controlled by Syrian government and Kurdish forces.

Moreover, the area is inhabited by thousands of displaced Kurds from Afrin, who fled the Turkish offensive in Afrin in March 2018.

The area in northern Aleppo is known for its frequent artillery shelling and missile strikes between Turkish and Kurdish forces, which began after Turkish forces took control of Afrin. Turkey also regularly carries out drone strikes in the area.

On Saturday, a Turkish drone strike killed three Kurdish fighters in northern Aleppo.

According to a tweet of the Syrian-based Rojava Information Centre (RIC), this is the 17th Turkish drone strike in northeast Syria since the start of the year.

[nicklloydnow]

“Russia has successfully conducted tests on parts of its next-generation "Poseidon" nuclear-capable torpedo, according to reports.

Testing of reactors for the Poseidon unmanned nuclear-powered underwater drones shows "their operability and safety have been confirmed," Russian state news agency RIA Novosti reported on June 23. The report was also shared on Russian-language social media channels.

"They are ready to work as intended," the Kremlin-backed outlet quoted an unnamed source "in the military-industrial complex." The first "sea tests" are scheduled for this summer.

The existence of the Poseidon "super-torpedo" was leaked to the international media in 2015 before it was formally announced in 2018. Moscow intends for the Poseidon, which can carry both conventional and nuclear warheads, to be a "second- or third-strike option that could ensure a retaliatory strike against U.S. cities," according to a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report from March 2022.

(…)

Also known as "Status-6" or "Kanyon," state media reported that the torpedo is 20 meters long and 1.8 meters in diameter, weighing in at around 100 tons. Sidharth Kaushal, a research fellow for seapower and missile defense at the Royal United Services Institute think tank, told Euronews Next in May 2022 that the weapon could have a range of at least 10,000 kilometers, or 6,200 miles.

(…)

The Russian state news agency Tass reported in January 2019 that the Russian Navy would put around 32 Poseidon drones on combat duty across four submarines, with each vessel carrying eight Poseidon torpedoes. These submarines would be part of Russia's Northern and Pacific fleets, the outlet said.

Special-purpose submarines, carrying the Poseidon "super-torpedo," will join the Pacific Fleet in the far eastern Kamchatka peninsula between the end of next year and the start of 2025, according to Tass.”

“We believe Russia’s continued observance of New START Treaty limits is increasingly unlikely. Russian President Vladimir Putin could rely more on nuclear weapons to compensate for his declining conventional performance in Ukraine. Should Russia do so and, on the worst day, choose to preemptively strike the U.S. nuclear arsenal in a crisis, President Putin has a range of options to employ against America’s intercontinental ballistic missile force. For this and other reasons discussed below, we believe that the United States should keep its intercontinental ballistic force “on alert” and maintain its “launch under attack” option to both ensure the force’s survivability in a conflict and deter adversaries from seriously contemplating a first strike.

(…)

While not stated directly, the only way to demonstrate a commitment to end the launch under attack option and to prevent the president from executing this option is to de-alert the force. These actions would be dangerous and would undermine America’s response to the rapid nuclear breakout of China and Russian aggression.

Montoya and Kemp are correct in suggesting that it is difficult to successfully eliminate land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles in a first strike because of the total number of weapons required for this task. The 400 missiles, across 450 silos, with 45 launch control centers, and the ability to launch from the Airborne Launch Control System, make the intercontinental ballistic missile leg of the nuclear triad a formidable challenge to a Russian first strike. These characteristics of the nation’s silo-based single-warhead missiles make them valuable; ensuring their destruction is a daunting task that enhances American deterrence.

(…)

Montoya and Kemp are correct in saying that “the United States currently maintains the option to launch under attack so that in the event of a first strike by Russia, U.S. silo-based missiles could be launched before they are destroyed.” An option does not constitute a posture or a doctrine.

The primary purpose of a launch under attack option is to enhance not missile survivability but deterrence. Deterrence is a psychological effect achieved in the mind of an adversary. The United States enhances deterrence by threatening cost imposition, reducing the benefits of action, and encouraging restraint. Launch under attack reduces the benefits of action by increasing uncertainty and perceived risk. President Putin does not know if he will strike empty silos.

(…)

With a ballistic missile force on alert, Russia must employ a shoot-shoot-look tactic because it must achieve complete destruction with a first strike or risk retaliation. This is necessary because the current launch under attack option forces Russian planners to employ a much higher percentage of the force in a first strike, hoping the United States does not launch its long-range missiles before Russian reentry vehicles strike their targets. This creates the uncertainty needed to deter a first strike.

It is also worth reiterating that a Russian first strike is highly unlikely prior to a breakout that gives the Russian military significantly more fielded warheads than the United States. In such a situation, launch under attack becomes even more important because a larger Russian arsenal means the percentage of their force needed to conduct a first strike decreases, and exchange ratios are meaningless.

(…)

Putin’s recent suspension of Russian participation in New START only underscores our view that any Russian strike on the United States will take place after a breakout that is unmatched by the United States. Given Russia’s track record for cheating on treaties (Convention on Biological and Toxic Weapons, Chemical Weapons Convention, Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, and Open Skies), it is unwise to think they would abide by treaty requirements prior to a nuclear strike on the United States.

(…)

Thus, arguments that suggest an attack on the missile fields are somehow acceptable because the submarine and bomber legs of the triad will go untouched in a conflict are fundamentally flawed. We assess that any attack will begin with attempts to blind the United States by taking out space-based integrated tactical warning and attack assessment capabilities, all while cyber attacks and sabotage attempt to take out command and control. In our assessment, attacks on submarine and bomber bases are also likely to precede or coincide with attacks across the missile fields.

Military planners must consider the enemy’s most dangerous course of action, in which a Russian attack employs surprise and, consistent with Russia’s operational approach, uses overwhelming force in an initial attack. This leaves the United States insufficient time to deploy the submarine fleet or load and disperse bombers. Under these conditions, ported submarines and much of the bomber fleet are early casualties in a Russian first strike. With the development of a second nuclear-armed peer adversary, America must take the steps necessary to enhance survivability across the triad.

Conclusion

We do agree with Montoya and Kemp when they write, “Instead of holding fast to the idea of immediate launch, it is far sounder to build a nuclear capability that can survive a first strike and for which decision-makers are not pressed to make decisions with incomplete information.” To achieve this objective, it will take strategic decisions like building mobile intercontinental ballistic missiles, increasing the number of hardened and deeply buried facilities, and placing strategic bombers on dispersed nuclear alert. Continuing on America’s current modernization trajectory will never achieve what both Montoya and Kemp and these authors desire.

It is important to maintain an on-alert missile force capable of launching under attack if the United States desires to deter Russia from contemplating a first strike on the nation’s missile fields. Removing the launch under attack option will not improve the credibility of American deterrence or reduce the risk of accidental detonation or war. It will only further undermine American credibility. With President Putin suspending Russian participation in the New START Treaty, a breakout from treaty restrictions cannot be ruled out. Such a decision would only make a launch under attack option even more important for maintaining deterrence.”

“These days, it is nuclear issues reawakened by the Ukrainian war, the widespread discussion of war with China provoked by the Taiwan dispute, the unsettled Iran question and the growing North Korean capability that are in the limelight. They are being treated as something novel under the sun. That is perplexing – and disturbing. Decades ago, very able minds conducted fine-grain examinations of the logic and psychology of nuclear strategy which produced analysis of remarkable sophistication. It acquired further authority by the experience of the past 70 years. Yet, today self-proclaimed experts and pundits take exceptional liberties that reflect neither focused thought nor history nor any awareness whatsoever that the matters they freely pronounce on have been addressed previously in a thorough-going fashion.

This situation has prompted me to attempt a summing up of what we have learned since 1945 and to apply it to present and prospective circumstances. It is intended to establish a conceptual framework for consideration of the two current deviations from orthodox nuclear wisdom that have gained currency: 1) the feasibility of employing low yield tactical nuclear weapons (TNW) to alter the balance in a conventional military conflict; 2) the possibility that the protagonists could engage in restricted nuclear exchanges without it escalating into a cataclysm. The commentary is unusually lengthy due to the inclusion of supplementary material. (…)

10. This above logic manifestly has been absorbed by everyone who has been in a position to order a nuclear strike. No civilian leader (and nearly all military commanders) with the authority to launch a nuclear attack ever believed that the result would be other than a massive exchange -mutual suicide for those with large arsenals. Certainly, that was true from the early 1960s onwards once the USSR had deployed reliable retaliatory nuclear weapons and the notion of ‘winning’ a nuclear exchange of any kind faded in the Pentagon and among its intellectual auxiliaries. This sobering reality did not encourage risk-taking at lower levels of conflict. Just the opposite.

(…)

2b. Two things deter: certainty (see ‘3’); and total uncertainty (see ‘1’ above). Certainty can take the form of tripwires: e.g. Tactical Nuclear Weapons in Europe deployed on the battlefield that almost surely would escalate into strategic, inter-continental exchanges. Certainty could take another form: “launch-on-warning.” That is to say, as soon as incoming missiles are detected – in whatever number, on whatever trajectory – ICBMs and SLBMs are activated and launched. That also obviates the risk that an incoming strike might ‘decapitate’ the targeted government’s leadership – leaving it paralyzed to respond. Knowledge that such arrangements are in place should be the ultimate deterrent to an intentional first-strike. However, in the event of an accidental launch or limited launch, you have committed both sides to suicide. The U.S. government never has stated that in has in place any such arrangement to provides a direct link between warning system and release of ICBMs – but there are recurrent assertions that in fact they have existed since Jimmy Carter’s day.

(…)

4d. In nuclear matters, it is dangerous to put together a team of intelligent strategic planners who have plenty of time and a mandate to think out of the box. They likely will generate intricate schemes which have a surface plausibility but in fact only a tenuous connection to reality. The performance of the RAND Corp in service to the Air Force confirms that fear. Here is an example of the extreme proposals that can emanate from this type of blue-sky thinking; One idea that got off the drawing board envisaged a reaction to signals that NORAD had picked up flights of Soviet missiles on a trajectory pointing to our own missile silos. It called for a synchronized startup of our 1,000 plus liquid-fueled ATLAS rocket engines which would produce such a tremendous reverberation as to stop the rotation of the earth for a micro-second. As a result, the Soviet missiles would miss their targets – winding up in Missouri cornfields, Mount Rushmore and Yellowstone Park instead. Physicists possessing a modicum of knowledge realized that it was a ridiculous expectation – and, if such a shock could be produced, the earth itself would split open. (See Ellsberg for a fuller account).

In short, the nuclear doctrine with attendant deployments that is most effective as deterrent is the worst to have in place were actual hostilities to break out.

Theoretically, there is a way to reconcile the two objectives: loudly announce that you have set in place launch-on-warning arrangements but refrain from doing so. Nobody is likely to call your bluff.

(…)

This reasoning highlights how reckless is both the idea that a conventional war between nuclear powers could be fought without escalating to the nuclear plane, and the belief that there is no escalatory ladder from battlefield TNWs and an all-out nuclear exchange.

7g. For a while, concocting nuclear scenarios – strategic (counterforce) and tactical focused on TNWs in Europe – was a sort of intellectual parlor game among defense intellectuals (including some military people). By the mid-70s, it ran its course as everyone came to accept the ‘Bomb’ even if they didn’t come to love it. The role of SLBMs in solidifying MAD was the capstone.

(…)

8h. Here is one general thought about extended deterrence as a ‘generic’ type. Throughout the Cold War years, the United States and its strategically dependent allies wrestled with the question of credibility. Years of mental tergiversations never resolved it. For one intrinsic reason: it is harder to convince an ally than it is to convince a potential enemy of your readiness to use the threat of retaliation to protect them. There are two aspects to this oddity. First, the enemy has to consider the psychology of only one other party; the ally has to consider the psychology of two other parties. Then, the enemy knows the full direct costs of underestimating our credibility and, in a nuclear setting, will always be ultra conservative in its calculations. By contrast, the ally that has not experienced the hard realities of both being a possible target of a nuclear attack and the possible originator of a nuclear attack cannot fully share in this psychology.

(…)

It is imperative that we restate and absorb the understanding acquired decades ago. For there is a new generation of writers on nuclear strategy that seems bent on either ignoring or rejecting it. One is the revival of “counterforce” doctrine. Simply put, “counterforce” is apposite to Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) in that it posits the possibility of fighting a winning a nuclear encounter. The postulated ability to destroy the retaliatory capability of the enemy through a first-strike that eliminates its missiles (land or sea-based), strategic bombers and nuclear tipped cruise missiles deployed on ships. Such a disarming blow, as the scenario goes, neutralizes the opponent’s deterrence – making the country hostage to your coercive demands. General speaking, it encourages risk-taking in crisis-management.

‘Counterforce’ concepts defined American nuclear war plans throughout the 1950s. Kennedy and McNamara forced modifications but the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP) designed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff was amended only gradually. Right into the 1970s, the SIOP gave primacy to variations of ‘Counterforce’ doctrine – this despite the Soviet Union’s development of an assured second-strike retaliatory capability. They remain an integral part of the SIOP to this day.

“Counterforce” ideas always have encountered two analytical obstacles: one technical, the other psycho/political. In order to contemplate such a strategy,` one must have at its disposal missiles of extreme accuracy able to destroy hardened missile silos, means to detect and destroy nuclear armed submarines, and wide coastal coverage that ensures the targeting of surface vessels. This conjectured capability, moreover, must possess a degree of reliability and precision that makes success a near certainty. Otherwise, you open your country to destruction by the enemy’s surviving force – a small fraction of which are adequate to wreak intolerable damage on population centers. Any government that perceives even a slight vulnerability to a first-strike would, of course, reject the idea of playing a “counterforce game” and instead threaten massive retaliation.

New-age “counterforce” revivalists focus on technical advantages which might aid the aggressor. In particular, there is reference to improved missile accuracy aimed at hard targets.4 Reducing the CEP (Circular Error Probability) by a few tens of feet, though, is not the crucial variable. That number already has been extremely low (50 – 100 feet) for decades. Emphasis is also placed on improved tracking technique for detecting submarines. What lacks is assurance that the net effect is to reduce the odds on retaliation by SLBM to near zero. Unless one can do that, unilateral deterrence sets in.

That leads us to the second precondition: the ability to intimidate a nuclear armed opponent by a) demonstrating a first-strike capability or b) launching a comprehensive first-strike and daring the enemy to retaliate with the remnant of its own nuclear force and face destruction itself. The counter to the first, as noted above, is to threaten retaliation against high-value targets (cities) and perhaps to deploy and advertise “launch on warning” or trip-wire mechanisms. The counter to the second is a matter of will and emotion. Nobody considering a first-strike can know with confidence what the enemy’s state of mind and emotion would be in the hypothetical circumstances. When the stake is your continued existence as an organized society, no reasonably sane person(s) will tempt fate in the hope of guessing right.

(…)

All doctrines and strategies for nuclear war-fighting – whether of the ‘counterforce’ variety or TNW variety – are largely fanciful. Not only is their logic flawed, as demonstrated above, but they predicate a cool-headed rationality of individuals and institutions which is unrealistic. Human beings are not calculating machines, no matter how high their office or how grave the matters they treat. They are susceptible to emotions and impulses that can distort or even override pure rationality. When you place them in settings where multiple other human beings are involved under intense pressure, the possibility of deviating off the track of impeccable logic increases.

In truth, we have no grounds for assuming that government leaders, at multiple levels making decisions and charged with operationalizing them, will collectivity behave as postulated by nuclear war-fighting scenarios. Herman Kahn, the early Henry Kissinger, Thomas Schelling at times, and today’s self-conscious revisionists have fantasized about a world that doesn’t exist.* These days, when the head of the biggest nuclear power is Donald Trump, the purveyors of doctrines that feature intricate nuclear games are as deluded as the President himself.

(…)

Nuclear strategy is a bit like Marxism or Freudian analysis or market fundamentalist economics. A lot of superior minds deploy their talents to concoct ingenious elaborations of received Truth that demonstrate brilliant logic – but their conclusions are completely divorced from reality.”

[papasmoke]

On the 2000 election, which I without a shadow of a doubt know you hold third party voters the most responsible for:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2018/11/15/its-insanity-how-brooks-brothers-riot-killed-recount-miami/

On Trump's Supreme Court case, which you act like is some unprecedented bit of authoritarianism.

Trump is arguing his actions are legal explicitly based on the extrajuducial killing of American citizens carried out under Obama. He is right that American president's are immune to prosecution for the crimes they commit while in office. Being the president is a job consisting mainly of committing unspeakable crimes and kicking the can down the road on taking responsibility for any of it. Trump had a protestor assassinated by US Marshalls (which he is not on trial for and lets be real the dems would never want him prosuecuted for), Obama had the teenage son of the guy Trump references him having airstriked also killed in a separate airstrike several years later, Obama massively expanded the scope of the US's drone mission and handed the keys off to Trump, Obama bailed out the banks after the financial crisis, in any sane society all of these actions would be crimes worthy of at the minimum a life in prison. Bush killed a million fucking people in Iraq, he's not in jail. Clinton bombed a fucking major pharmaceutical factory in Sudan and shrugged and washed their hands of itwhen their bullshit justification for the targeted strike disintegrated. These are all crimes that democratic and republican presidents alike have gotten away with. If Trump wins his supreme court it will not only be due to the undemocratic nature of the court itself but off the back of his criminal predecessors.

On Biden's supposed uninvolvement with the nationwide police crackdown on student protestors, where the near universal justification for police intervention has been to fight rampant violent antisemitism.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/21/columbia-university-protest-biden-antisemitism/

If you feel like defending Biden's stance here feel free.

[mariacallous]

The explosion at the Toropets strategic ammunition depot in Russia’s Tver Oblast, approximately 500km from Ukraine, was recorded at 2.7 on the Richter scale, equivalent to a mild earthquake.

The massive explosion at Russia’s Toropets strategic ammunition depot, one of the country’s largest, highlights a significant blow to Russian military capabilities and exposes ongoing vulnerabilities in their defense systems. The attack’s success, despite claimed air defense interceptions, underscores Ukraine’s growing ability to strike deep within Russian territory.

As reported by the United Kingdom and its Ministry of Defense, fires resulting from the attack covered a 6 km-wide area. It is highly likely that poor storage of munitions, left vulnerable to one-way attack (OWA) uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAV), caused a chain reaction of cascading detonations within the bunker system, resulting in enormous losses of ordnance.

Analysts of the British military intelligence agency argue that Russian air defense continues to struggle with Ukrainian deep strike operations, despite claiming to have intercepted more than 50 UAVs in this attack.

The British military analysts note that, although part of a wider supply network, this loss will highly likely disrupt Russian ground operations, particularly in the Kursk Oblast.

Munitions for frontline use, including from North Korea

Overnight on 17/18 September 2024, Ukraine conducted a successful strike on Toropets in Russia’s Tver Oblast. This depot is a storage site of the 107th Arsenal of the Russian Main Missile and Artillery Directorate, and almost certainly housed munitions of varying calibers for frontline use, as well as missiles and glide bombs used by nearby airfields.

In addition, ammunition procured from North Korea was also reportedly stored here.

Renovated in 2018, this is one of Russia’s largest strategic ammunition depots directly supporting its combat operations in Ukraine, storing more than 30,000 tonnes of ordnance.

Recent improvements to the site had been driven by previous poor storage of aging explosive material leading to a series of explosions across several depots.

One such explosion in June 2011 in Pugachevo, Udmurtia, saw 3,000 homes damaged and 30,000 people evacuated.

[quoteoftheweekblog]

11/11/24 - LORE SEGAL (AND PAUL BAILEY)

' "If all things are possible … why does he let wars happen, and concentration camps … !" ' (Segal, 2018, p.191).

REFERENCE

Segal, L. (2018 [1964] ) 'Other people’s houses - a novel’. Amazon.com [E-book]. Available at: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Other-People%C2%92s-Houses-Lore-Segal/dp/1565849507 (Accessed 10 November 2024).

*****

ARMISTICE DAY

...

...

SADLY

BANG ON

*****

SEE ALSO

' … the naivete of American politics … ' (Segal, 2018, p.204).

*****

AMERICA DIDN'T

VOTE DEMOCRAT

*****

UNUSUALLY BASINGSTOKE DID

…

VOTE LABOUR

*****

RIP 2024

…

LORE SEGAL 7/10/24

OBITUARY

…

&

PAUL BAILEY 27/10/24

OBITUARY

…

RIP

*****

QUOTE OF THE WEEK 2011 - 2024

…

13 EPIC YEARS

*****

FROM THE ARCHIVE

…

14/11/22

*****

[swldx]

BBC 0409 14 Oct 2024

12095Khz 0358 14 OCT 2024 - BBC (UNITED KINGDOM) in ENGLISH from TALATA VOLONONDRY. SINPO = 45334. English, dead carrier s/on @0358z then ID@0359z pips and newsday preview. @0401z World News anchored by Neil Nunes. § Four soldiers have been killed and more than 60 other people injured in a drone strike targeting an army base in northern Israel, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has said. The IDF added seven soldiers had been severely injured in the attack on a base "adjacent to Binyamina" - a town around 20 miles (33km) to the south of Haifa. Hezbollah has claimed responsibility for the attack, which it said targeted a training camp of the IDF's Golani Brigade in the area, which is based between Tel Aviv and Haifa. The armed group's media office said the strike was in response to Israeli attacks in southern Lebanon and Beirut on Thursday. § The UN peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon says Israeli tanks forced their way into one of its positions early on Sunday morning. UN secretary general António Guterres warned any attacks on peacekeepers "may constitute a war crime", adding that "Unifil personnel and its premises must never be targeted". "Attacks against peacekeepers are in breach of international law, including international humanitarian law," Mr Guterres said, according to a statement from his spokesman. The incident is the latest in a growing number of encounters between Unifil and Israeli forces. § China is holding military exercises around Taiwan, in what it calls a "stern warning" against those seeking "independence" for the self-ruled island. The drills are seen as a response to a speech by Taiwanese President William Lai last week, in which he vowed to resist "annexation" by Beijing. Taiwan's Ministry of Defense has condemned what it describes as "irrational and provocative behaviour" by China, adding it is ready to defend itself. Taiwan's transport ministry says air traffic and port operations remain "normal" despite the military drills off the coast. § A man in illegal possession of a shotgun and a loaded handgun was arrested at an intersection near Donald Trump's rally in Coachella, California, on Saturday, police said. The 49-year-old suspect, Vem Miller, was driving a black SUV when he was stopped at a security checkpoint by deputies, who located the two firearms and a "high-capacity magazine". Multiple passports with multiple names and multiple driving licences were found in the car, the sheriff said, adding that the licence plate was "home-made" and not registered. § A public inquiry is to begin later in Salisbury, to examine how a woman from Wiltshire was killed by a 2018 poisoning blamed on Russian agents. Dawn Sturgess, 44, died after coming into contact with Novichok - the same chemical weapon used to target a former Russian spy four months earlier. § Mexican authorities said on Sunday they had found the bodies of five decapitated men on a road in western Jalisco state, the latest grisly find in the violence-plagued country. The violence in Jalisco is blamed chiefly on the Jalisco Nueva Generacion Cartel (CJNG), one of Mexico's most powerful and violent criminal groups. § Kenyan Ruth Chepngetich completed Sunday's Chicago Marathon with a world record-breaking time of 2:09:56. She crossed the finish line in Grant Park nearly two full minutes faster than the previous record time, set by Tigist Assefa of Ethiopia last year in Berlin. § Robotics specialists developed a three-armed robot capable of conducting an orchestra. Named MAiRA Pro S, the robot conducted the Dresden Symphony Orchestra in two new works at the orchestra's 25th anniversary concert. @0406z "Newsday" begins. Backyard gutter antenna w/MFJ-1020C active antenna (used as a preamplifier/preselector), JRC NRD-535D, 250kW, beamAz 315°, bearing 63°. Received at Plymouth, MN, United States, 15359KM from transmitter at Talata Volonondry. Local time: 2258.

[metamatar]

the vaccine thing is insidious even now. the us government using healthcare workers to gather intelligence for directing drone strikes in afghanistan led to a suspension of the polio vaccine campaign in taliban controlled areas. afghanistan was the polio capital of the world in 2018. they've resumed polio vaccination campaigns now under the taliban, but the death and misery of those infected was completely avoidable.

can't find exact sources about its use in afghanistan atm but it was used in the bin laden assassination:

I know this isn’t a novel observation but I’ve been reading a lot of articles about colonial and imperial policy (specifically demography history papers) & one pattern that keeps coming up is that colonial/imperial governments try to institute what can reasonably be described as “good” social policies in colonised places (like vaccine programs, funding for schools, etc, things that are associated with the smooth functioning of a state), and these are often rejected by local colonised governments and people because like obviously they don’t trust colonial/imperial administrators wanting to become involved with their healthcare or education. And what often ends up happening is this backlash against “progressive” policies because they’re being pushed by colonial governments, so you get shit like the Catholic Church running all the primary schools in Ireland because they refuse to open British-funded state schools, or people refusing to immunize their children because those “public goods” are (rationally & understandably) associated with things like US imperial population management programs. And then these colonial & imperial administrators turn around and say look! These people won’t even accept money for schools and vaccines! Look how backwards they are! And paint colonised populations as Great Rejectors of Democracy which western populations then readily eat up. Just a really horrendous feedback loop of misery that generates a lot of ‘secondary’ death and violence on top direct colonial oppression and plunder