Elerond

XA-180s and XA-185s, don't have much of electronics and they are designed to be easy to support and they are also used by UN peace keepers, they have existing global support lines. M113s are designed to need minimalist logistic support also Poland has M113s, and is able to provide support for them in Ukraine FV103 Spartan is from 1978, it does not have much of electronics, so maybe Ukraine is able to support themselves with British instructions. YPR-765 is variant of M113, and is designed so that it can be supported with M113s parts. Also APCs usually only have machine guns and don't have targeting computers and other stuff that are found in IFVs, making them easier to support as you don't need special equipment, parts and needed knowledge is smaller. For example conscripts support XA-180s and XA-185s in Finnish Defense Forces, where BMPs and CV90s are supported by cadre engineers. Even me a software engineer was able to change oils, grease, filters, fluids, etc, change tiers, fix basic problems in engine in XA-185 with less than month training. And driving it is same as driving truck. BMPs for example I don't even know how to start them let alone drive them. EDIT: All the APC so far are also designed in 60s and 70s. M113 is from 1964, it is two years older design than BMP-1. XA-180/XA-185 is most 'modern' from 1983. Most of BMP-1s that have been given to Ukraine have been modernized, they have targeting computers, night vision, sensors etc. added to them. In most cases APCs have seen only little modernization and even then usually with newer variants and old ones have left untouched.

Poland gave Ukraine some of their old BMP-1s. Slovakia also send 30 BMP-1s to Ukraine and received 15 Leopards from Germany as compensation Slovenia send 35 BVP M80As to Ukraine Greece is currently in process to send 40 BMP-1s to Ukraine. Germany again approved selling 16 restored Marders to Ukraine There maybe more that are send without public knowledge EDIT: With IFVs there aren't that much western ones to offer as Eastern European countries have mostly relied on modernized BMPs and BMP variants. So they don't have anything else to offer and they can't support American, British or French IFVs.

Old stocks have limit, so at some point they will run out, but situation is not better on Russian side. As in most intensive days of their invasion, Russian artillery shoot more ammunition than Russia produces has typically produced in two years. So even though Russia has vast storages they don't have capacity to use such force for long especially when Ukraine targets their ammunition storages. So as war continues there will be inevitably a point where new weapons and ammunition needs to be produced and peace time production capacity needs to be increased if participants want to keep same intensity

New Zealand probably isn't best example considering their official equipment numbers. If arms stocked somewhere they didn't have much equipment to give in first place.

Considering it has been over 7 months and main target seem to have been Nord Stream 1, that Biden's statement seem bit stretch to use especially when rest of Biden's speech was about sanctions.

President of the European Commission threatens those responsible with nuclear war

There are so much marine traffic that area that no one will notice one civilian boat staying above the pipes EDIT: He is just idiot, as you can see from this Russian foreign ministry's tweet where they use it as tool of their propaganda

It is not easiest thing to tie new energy delivery contracts if you break your previous ones without reason. Even China's and India's energy companies has to think over multiple times their willingness to invest billions to build infrastructure to get Russian gas if their partner company in Russia may not fulfill their contractual obligation when it feels like it.

Yup they aren't in use, they only have minimum amount gas to keep needed pressure up. Because there is no steady stream of gas there is constant risk of leaks that will cause pressure drop in the pipes. But because both pipes started to suffer pressure loss quite same time, there is reason to believe that in was not a coincidence EDIT: Gazprom still needs excuse why it can't hold it end of agreement, in order to avoid sanctions in future in case that relationship between EU and Russia warms up. So far they have constantly found turbines that have suddenly broken. EDIT2: Russia also claims that pipes can't repaired because of sanctions. Germany say that such claim is bull****.

Chernobyl happened in spring, during fall the wind pattern is different as polar winds are stronger, so spread would have been different

Russia already uses strategic bombers, they fly over Black Sea and launch cruise missiles https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/russias-secretive-long-range-bomber-operations-against-ukraine

British empire and Russian empire gave Tibet to China in 1907 http://www.tibetjustice.org/materials/treaties/treaties12.html After fighting over it and then Qing dynasty declared Chinese sovereignty over Tibet. After fall of Qing dynasty in 1912, Tibet become de facto independent as civil war in China kept Chinese busy and not interested of what was happening in Tibet. Tibet didn't established ties to rest of the world except in 1914 they gave small parts of Himalayan to British India (which Chinese government denounced illegal) In 1932 National Revolutionary Army (non-communist troops of Chinese government that currently resides in Taiwan) destroyed Tibet's army, but then Japan invaded to China and quick truce was signed and Chinese troops left to fight against Japanese. In 1949 when communist party took over China with help of Stalin, Tibet expelled all Chinese connected to government. Mao Zedong send Chinese troops Tibet soon after he come in power. In 1950 Tibetian army surrendered to Chinese forces after mostly pacifistic resistance. In June 1950 British government declared that "His Majesty's Government have always been prepared to recognize Chinese suzerainty over Tibet, but only on the understanding that Tibet is regarded as autonomous." In 1951 China and TIbet signed 17 point agreement that formalized China's sovereignty over Tibet. After that China has ruled over Tibet but situation is still quite volatile

It would be stranger if Serbia would recognize independence of areas that self declare themselves as independent China has similar opposition against part of country declaring itself independent.

They have easier time to get anything but German tanks. Germany's current political atmosphere is such that they don't make any fast arms deliveries, as they go back and forth of arms they already have decided to deliver. Although most EU countries don't tell what aid they give Ukraine and how much and when. I saw in Ukrainians tweeting pictures of hundreds of Finnish made armored personnel carries (XA-180 and XA-185) that I used to drive in Finnish Defense forces and they were equipped with all sort equipment that revealed that they could not have come from anywhere than Finland's arms storages, but officially Finland has not given them to Ukraine.

Considering that there are no https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/business_economy_euro/banking_and_finance/documents/factsheet-agrifood-eu-sanctions_en.pdf "Contrary to Russia’s disinformation, the disruption of agricultural production and trade in Ukraine and the spike in global food prices is not caused by EU sanctions - but the very own actions of the Russian Government, such as: Russia should put an end to its actions to avoid a major food crisis. Agricultural products can be imported into the EU from Ukraine - and transferred to third countries! There are no EU sanctions on imports from Ukraine whatsoever. Even products from the non-government controlled areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts can be imported, under certain conditions (if examined and approved by the Ukrainian authorities). Phytosanitary products, including herbicides, fertilisers and agricultural machineries can be exported from the EU to Ukraine without restrictions! The restrictions on import of certain potash fertilisers under the EU sanctions on Russia and Belarus only apply to products imported to the EU and do not concern exports of them to Ukraine from the EU or from Russia. There is no cap or EU restriction for import of phytosanitary products as final products Public financing or financial assistance for trade to Ukraine is not restricted! Any EU company can invest and support agricultural production in Ukraine, except in the non-government controlled areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, Crimea or Sevastopol There are no EU sanctions targeting ancillary services for importing agricultural products into the EU from Ukraine and transfer them to third countries! EU companies can transport by road, air and sea agricultural products from Ukraine directly to the EU and onwards to partners, including via Ukrainian companies or any other non-sanctioned non-Russian companies. EU sanctions cover only bilateral trade between the EU and Russia - not international trade! EU sanctions have no extra-territorial effect. Third country persons and firms can import agrifood from Russia under EU sanctions if they do that entirely outside the EU. EU’s sanctions excluded a limited number of Russian banks from the SWIFT network. Banking relations via SWIFT can still continue via the other Russian banks. Agricultural products in Russia are not targeted by EU sanctions! EU sanctions do not prohibit EU businesses to purchase, import or pay for Russian agricultural products, provided that sanctioned persons are not involved. The EU has carefully avoided a direct and comprehensive ban on the import of Russian agricultural products. EU Member States can grant access to EU ports of vessels flying the Russian flag, as well as entry to the EU of Russian road carriers for the purposes of importing or transporting agricultural products, including fertilisers and wheat, that are not subject to prohibitions. When restricted services are necessary for importing agricultural products from Russia (including via Belarus), EU sanctions provide for specific exceptions! EU Member States can authorise Russian-flagged vessels access to EU ports and Russian road transport undertakings to operate in the EU if that is for trade in agricultural or food products, including wheat and fertilisers, if the latter is not otherwise prohibited. Public financing or financial assistance for trade by EU companies in the Russian agri-sector is also possible. Only a specific number of Russian and Belarusian banks – and not all – have been listed and/or de-SWIFTED EU businesses can make and receive payments for trade in agricultural products via other Russian and Belarusian banks EU sanctions also envisage several exceptions for humanitarian purposes By way of example, EU Member States can authorise overfly of their airspace by Russian aircraft if that is required for humanitarian purposes. EU Member States are also authorised to grant access to EU ports of Russian flagged-vessels, as well as entry to the EU of Russian road carriers for the purposes of importing or transporting agricultural products, including fertilizers and wheat, that are not subject to restrictions Agricultural products and food, including herbicides, fertilisers and agricultural machineries, can be exported from the EU to Russia, provided that no listed persons are involved! The cap and restrictions on certain fertilisers only apply to products imported in the EU and it does not concern exports of them to Russia or Belarus. EU asset freezes on Russian or Belarusian companies have minimum impact on the agricultural sector! EU sanctions target those responsible for the brutal aggression of Russia against Ukraine. The involvement of the majority of those responsible in the agricultural sector is highly unlikely. The listing of some persons owning or controlling companies in the Russian fertiliser sector does not prevent them from using their products in Russia. EU sanctions also do not bind operators from third countries that choose to maintain commercial ties with Russia." Commission's guidance about coal has not yet been published so it is difficult to say what it will contain in final form

How is housing market in SA, I have been looking house, but they are over priced here?

Today's news headlines from Finnish Newspapers "This is all that is known about Putin's mobilization order" "Finnish Defense Forces: Finland has prepared to Russian mobilization" "These civilian targets would be under threat if Russia would invade Finland" "Military expert: Russian invasion to Finland would probably start this way" "Over million Finns would need to evacuate from east to west if Russia would invade" "New study: Over 70% of older Finns fear possibility of Russian invasion" "What will happen if Russia suffers another big loss in Ukraine" "Ukraine war is making Poland an European super power - 'If Russians lose the war then someone will fill that void' " Difficult to say, as we don't know how much aid Ukraine has received and how much it has impacted their operations. And we don't have any way to measure what would have happened if Ukraine would not have received aid. You assume that Ukraine would have lost without aid and Russia would not have done mobilization in that scenario, but Russia's initial assault to Ukraine failed even without aid from west and Russia had very difficult time to have any gains in main battle front of the war from start. So it is difficult to estimate if mobilization would or would not happen without western aid. But Russia initial force was not big enough to over come resisting nation, their initial strategy was clearly based on belief that Ukraine would surrender with little resistance.

India seems to rethink their reliance to Russia https://edition.cnn.com/2022/09/21/india/india-us-talks-shifting-russia-reliance-intl-hnk/index.html

It is because of the fact if referendums are held and areas are joined to Russia, it will mean in current situation that areas that Russia claim to be Russia will be held by Ukraine, which means that it can't anymore be special military operation but a war where Russia is under attack. Which means that all the laws considering state of war will come in effect and that isn't usually good for business.

I wonder if DHS agents who falsified migrants records will face any consequences

When done correctly kosher and halal style slaughtering is as humane as is the industrial slaughtering used in most of the slaughterhouses. Kosher style got bad reputation in early 2000s when it was discovered that many kosher slaughter houses were cutting costs which lead to needles suffering of animals. Most famous case probably was Agriprocessors, that not only perpetrated animal cruelty (Peta's article containing gory videos), but bribed USDA inspectors, used illegal immigrants as slave workforce, deposited its waste to local river, used its power in Jewish community to remove kosher certification form competing slaughter houses and used mafia style intimidation technics drive competitions out from the business.

VVER reactors are much safer than Chernobyl's RBMK reactors in case of failures of cooling system. As water around of core is used as coolant and moderator, which means that in case of technical failure of coolant circulation, water around the core will evaporate and form steam bubbles, and as water in steam form does not moderate neutrons this will reduce intensity of the reaction intensity. So only loss power from cooling aggregators will not lead to nuclear disaster, but if for example core shell is damaged by artillery shell then there is possibility of nuclear disaster but not in scale of Chernobyl. But as ZNPP has six VVER-1000 reactors, there is possibility that if they all suffer damage that combined effect will lead to significant nuclear disaster.

Question is does US want to give Ukraine weapons that they can use to strike Russia. So far Biden has insisted that USA does not give such weapons to Ukraine.

By information that we have got from Ukraine, strategy on Kherson front has been different from Kharkiv front. In Kherson Ukraine has publicly told about offensive, they have focused on Russian supply lines, done only little to break defensive lines, where in Kharkiv they started with direct assault to Russian defensive positions and targeting Russian air defenses show that they could use drones and migs to support their assault. So in Kherson they seem to focus on wearing out Russian defenses and in Kharkiv their plan seems have been to surprise Russian defenses with direct assault. In Kharkiv they seem to have succeeded to surprise Russia and forced them to retreat to better position to avoid their troops becoming encircled. Amount of forces Ukraine has in their Kharkiv assault points that it was not just opportunistic offensive, but longer planned assault, as they used there for first time MiG's with new air to surface missiles from USA to take out Russian SAMs. Most of their heavy drones seems to also be in Kharkiv front.