21 ms·
Finland detains ship and its crew after critical undersea cable damaged
- neuroelectron 10mo agoIt sounds like the court will just throw it out again as not having jurisdiction over the case.
- wtcactus 10mo agoThen countries should be able to bomb these ships and go unpunished as well. That would pass the right message if courts keep refusing to make things right.
- immibis 10mo agoThey can. They don't want to yet. Europe always assumes too much good faith on the part of other countries.
- rjsw 10mo agoThe countries that the ships are registered in are not going to do anything if they are seized and scrapped.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- rwyinuse 10mo agoSinking the ships and then denying knowing anything about it would probably be the best course of action. That's what Russians would do, if the roles were reversed. Unfortunately too many Western leaders still think that it's possible to negotiate in good faith with Russians. In reality they respect only force, and see European rules based order and "fair play" as weakness. If Baltic states didn't belong to NATO and Finland didn't have such a big army, Russians would be already doing a lot worse things than cutting cables. Over here in Finland, even during the "good" years between collapse of the Soviet Union and invasion of Crimea, Russian businessmen kept buying property that made absolutely no economic sense, but was located next to critical infrastructure. Better relations between West and Russia were largely an illusion, especially since Putin took over.
- shtzvhdx 10mo ago"Sinking the ships and then denying knowing anything about it would probably be the best course of action. That's what Russians would do, if the roles were reversed." You mean like NATO did off the coast of Spain a year ago?
- rwyinuse 10mo agoI didn't remember that case, very interesting. But yes, silently torpedoing a Russian ship transporting military technology to another hostile rogue state is exactly what NATO should be doing.
- shtzvhdx 10mo agoDid I miss NATO declaring war on Russia and N. Korea? Or are we OK with the Chinese silently torpedoing the next batch of military equipment to Taiwan (a rouge province under intl law)? Your argument, taken to its limit, is might makes right. Which, fine; but we're just not that strong anymore. Certainly not the EUpeeans.
- purerandomness 10mo agoWhat's the point of declaring war in a war? Russia invaded Ukraine just fine without ever declaring war.
- shtzvhdx 10mo agoAs long as the EUpeans don't drag me, my loved ones, or my taxes into a war with Russia I couldn't care less if any this is declared or not nor do I care if they torpedo Russian ships. However, I also couldn't care less if the Russians Oreshniks Liverpool or Marseille.
- purerandomness 10mo agoFair enough, you do you. Meanwhile, we'll be protecting your loved ones.
- huhhuh 10mo agoThe court threw out the previous case since there was no proof of sabotage. I understood the court ruled that they have no jurisdiction over accident cases under international law. As far as I understand, it is totally different case if they find any proof of intent.
- stefan_ 10mo agoI don't understand how we arrived at letting "random nation crew drags their anchor making the boat extremely slow and loud and breaks $100M+ critical infrastructure" get off scot free including their boat but it clearly can't continue to go on. If not a court then government must step in, nothing less is acceptable to any voting person.
- fn-mote 10mo agoWith 10 undersea cables damaged in the Baltic 2023-2025, it’s obvious a different part of the government needs to become involved. Acting for your national security doesn’t need to (shouldn’t) mean there is no trial.
- rixed 10mo agoDoes 10 undersea cables damaged in 3 years sounds a lot to you?
- theshrike79 10mo agoThat many "accidents" with anchors kinda makes me doubt the training of the crews. It's NOT like driving with the handbrake on, it's more like shoving your car forcibly in reverse at full speed. You WILL notice it.
- csmpltn 10mo agoIt honestly starts to sound like they just botched the design and placement of these cables - placing them in shallow and exposed passages, with no proper defense against dragged anchors.
- helsinkiandrew 10mo agoUnfortunately the Baltic is pretty shallow and fairly featureless - the gulf of Finland - between Finland, Estonia, and Russia averages 38 metres deep
- karmakurtisaani 10mo agoIf only they had had you in the design team back then when the cables were put in place. I'm sorry I have no snark-free way to respond to this.
- r2_pilot 10mo agoReal shades of "that cable shouldn't have been dressed like that, in a dark and narrow channel, clearly marked on navigation charts(to mitigate exactly this scenario, from good captains at least)" energy.
- TulliusCicero 10mo agoYeah, why don't they lower the floor of the entire Baltic Sea??
- mmh0000 10mo agoObviously, you're joking. But how hard could it be to get a Cat 395 excavator in there? Dig a little trench and bury it. Sounds like a weekend project to me. Has someone told the telecoms this?
- karmakurtisaani 10mo agoI think they could just drag a suitable hook behind a ship to carve out decent trench. Geez, how are we so much better at this than the actual engineers? Edit: to parent comment, I think people missed your joke.
- shmerl 10mo agoThere needs to be a blockade for these rogue ships. That's the only thing they'll understand, short of being sunk.
- TulliusCicero 10mo agoJust seize the ships and auction them off. Damaging one cable isn't gonna be worth losing a whole ship, generally speaking.
- lawlessone 10mo agoGiven the state some of these ships are starting to be in they might just be worth scrap..
- bluGill 10mo agoOften the cost to scrap a ship exceedes the value of the raw materials. Depends the ship as well but things like asbestos can drive costs up
- edm0nd 10mo agonah just sink them instead imo. they arent worth much.
- mmooss 10mo agoWho controls these ships and what is their perspective? I don't understand how we know what they 'understand' or not? Also, how do you identify the ships? Do you blockade all maritime traffic in the Baltic Sea? All too and from Russia? The first would destroy our own economy, the second is a certain act of war.
- shmerl 10mo agoLikely Russia. Their idea is to engage in war under pretense that it's not a war. What I mean is that they will only understand counter measures that you'd take in a war, like blockade or sink them for instance. I.e. they are already engaging in the acts of war, so it's late to worry about that, the question is what is anyone doing about it. Ukraine sinks their fleet in the Black Sea, and they understood it very well - they don't leave their ports.
- internet2000 10mo agoDon't even need to click to know it's the Russians.
- amiga386 10mo agoEvery single ship in/out of St Petersburg goes via the Gulf of Finland. All those ships will be "Russian" (have stopped in Russia). It doesn't mean they're "Russian". Owner, charterer, flag, crew can all have very different nationalities. Which part or combination makes them "Russian", in the sense of "the Russian state asked asked the ship to harm Finnish infrastructure, and they actually did it"? You can lazily speculate about the aggressive, warmaking nation (that illegally annexed Crimea, is currently at war with Ukraine, is regularly sending submarines, ships, drones, jets into the territories of its neighbours) all you like... but if you want to be able to prosecute them, you need to be able to show evidence of the Russian state ordering this action, and that the cable damage was actually caused by that ship. Where is your evidence?
- javier2 10mo agoThe crew on these ships are usually all Russians, the ship is often registered in Cayman, Panama or somewhere else. These ships often sail under a third nationality, but when the ships are seized, only complaints are filed from Russian lawyers. Take from that what you will.
- mmooss 10mo agoIs every American carrying out American government policy? It's a big stretch.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- computerfriend 10mo agoEvery American destroying submarine cables might be, yes.
- TulliusCicero 10mo agoIt's pretty obvious what's happening here. The response needs to be forceful: seize and auction off the ships. There needs to be sufficient deterrent to actually stop this from happening.
- Braxton1980 10mo ago[flagged]
- TulliusCicero 10mo agoAre these ships actually owned by the Russian state? I thought it was more Russia paying private operators to do some sabotage alongside legitimate business. In which case, ships being seized would absolutely be a huge deterrent to whoever owns or insures the ships. But yes, imprisoning the crew (especially the captain) is also a good idea.
- zoklet-enjoyer 10mo agoWhat do you mean by eliminate?
- aaomidi 10mo agoYou know exactly what they mean
- zoklet-enjoyer 10mo agoExecuting people for cutting cables is extreme and I'm sure illegal in any country worth living in
- aaomidi 10mo agoI agree. However media has removed morality and ethics from people when it comes to this war.
- 10mo ago
- lysace 10mo agoTwo other cable cuts/"damages" happened around the same dates. Two separate Arelion-owned cables between Sweden/Estonia and Finland/Estonia. https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/JOow58/kabelbrott-mellan-sverige-och-estland https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/JOow58/kabelbrott-mella... (Swedish) [...] two of their submarine cables – one between Sweden and Estonia and one between Estonia and Finland – have been damaged. The first cable was damaged on December 30th and the second on December 31st. (Arelion is AS1299/formerly known as Telia Carrier. The name change happened because it's now owned by a Swedish government-managed infrastructure-focused pension fund.)
- Animats 10mo agoThat narrow passage is becoming a war zone. Look at a map. It's one of Russia's few outlets to the sea. Look at the history of Russia vs. Finland and Russia vs. Estonia. This is one of the world's most hostile choke points.
- jacquesm 10mo agoThat or the Suwalki gap. They're both flashpoints.
- rwyinuse 10mo agoYep, if Russia wants to expand its conflict against Europe, Narva in Estonia is most likely place for it. Over 90% of its population is ethnic Russian, and it's located right next to the Russian border. It's the perfect place to send some armed "separatists" to see how NATO responds. My bet is that it'll happen sometime between 2029-2035, after UK, France and Germany have had their general elections, where populist parties with more pro-Russian stances are likely to gain power.
- Zanfa 10mo ago> Yep, if Russia wants to expand its conflict against Europe, Narva in Estonia is most likely place for it. Over 90% of its population is ethnic Russian, and it's located right next to the Russian border. It's the perfect place to send some armed "separatists" to see how NATO responds. Fortunately while close, the border runs along a fairly wide river with just a single bridge across, so logistically somewhat complicated to supply with heavy equipment from the Russian side. At least covertly. But definitely a scenario that needs to be considered.
- JumpCrisscross 10mo ago> logistically somewhat complicated to supply with heavy equipment from the Russian side Little green men. Crimea is an island.
- coffinbirth 10mo ago[flagged]
- jaennaet 10mo agoYeah sure, we keep cutting our own telecoms cables multiple times per year, using Russian-operated ships as a front. The Eagle S (I think it was?) case was brought to court here in Finland and they even admitted to dragging heir anchor but steadfastly maintained that it was due to their own incompetence (which the judge unfortunately believed.) I suppose that was also a NATO ploy?
- throwaway_dang 10mo agoThe US is blowing up Venezuelan boats, and according to Seymour Hersh, blew up Nord Stream. Why would a few cables be beyond US/NATO capabilities if it drums up popular support for US extra-judicial interdiction of other countries' maritime activity?
- jaennaet 10mo agoDo you understand that this has been going on for much longer than the US's Venezuelan murder spree, and longer than Trump has been president (this time around)? Also, as I said, we have a crew of a Russian-operated ship on the record admitting to cutting a cable by dragging their anchor, and all the previous cases have also been traced to other Russian-operated ships (well, I think one was Chinese though) using AIS and radar data, and this has been done by OSINT folks in addition to the local authorities here around the Baltic. Are all of these people being controlled by NATO and the US? Pro-Russian people like you assume that other countries will always just let the US or "NATO" do whatever they want and have absolutely zero autonomy at all, and you're absolute experts at ignoring everything that doesn't fit your insanely simplistic narrative that's predicated on the idea that Russia is just a perpetual victim and a spooky spooky NATO CIA USA cabal is actually doing everything bad that the Russians get up to.
- throwaway_dang 10mo ago
- HelloUsername 10mo agoRelated, posted a day ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46445484 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46445484 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46443925 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46443925
- greesil 10mo agoMine the Gulf of Finland, problem solved. This may create other problems but hey Finland is part of NATO now.
- deliciousturkey 10mo agoThe fact that this area where the incident happened, Gulf of Finland, is not fully part Finnish/Estonian territorial waters, is only because of a bilateral Finnish-Estonian agreement. This was done in the 1990's purely for benevolence towards Russia. Russia clearly hasn't acted in such way that they should enjoy these kinds of acts of benevolence. Finland and Estonia should seriously consider retreating from this agreement.
- vzaliva 10mo agoYou saying the Finland and Estonia are guilty of russia cutting their cables because they signed an agreement?!
- gpm 10mo agoPretty sure they are saying "more vulnerable to" not "guilty".
- mig39 10mo agoNo, he's saying that the area is international waters because Finland and Estonia agreed it was not either's territorial waters. It doesn't have to be international waters.
- dmix 10mo agoNATO probably doesn't want to play that game with China's stance on the seas around them. They make a big deal about having international waters that foreign navies can transit.
- rtkwe 10mo agoThe fight in and around China's sea claims is they encroach into what the rest of the world generally agrees are other countries waters not international waters. The US would still insist it could travel through the Taiwanese or Phillipine waters China wants to claim as their own. It doesn't seem to map at all on to the situation between Finland and Estonia.
- Fairburn 10mo agoLock em up, sell thier property. Rinse and repeat.
- reaperducer 10mo agoLock em up, sell thier property. Rinse and repeat. Works for small and medium-sized private companies. Doesn't work for major nations like Russia. Doing as you suggest is like writing parking tickets for delivery trucks. They don't care. It's just a cost of doing business.
- razakel 10mo agoWhy wouldn't it work? The oligarchs would certainly be a bit upset if they lost their yachts, mansions, sports teams, and everywhere else they keep their wealth away from Putin.
- reaperducer 10mo agoIt's been repeatedly demonstrated that the oligarchs are just as expendable as the ships.
- mr_toad 10mo agoThat’s all been confiscated already.
- lostlogin 10mo agoAll? That doesn’t seem likely.
- Sabinus 10mo agoRussia needs to work with the private sector to buy and crew the ships, and there is only so many ships they can buy and lose before it's not worth the money or hassle for either Russia or their private partners.
- 10mo ago
- iambateman 10mo agoAssuming it is state-sponsored sabotage…why? Whats the outcome they want? Is it just turning up the heat in the region?
- jopsen 10mo agoScaring people, distraction, etc. In the grand scheme, repairing the cables and supporting Ukraine will cost less and hurt Russia more than escalating tentions in the Baltic sea.
- everfrustrated 10mo agoThey want to test how quickly the cables get repaired and what vessels do the repairs etc.
- aDyslecticCrow 10mo agoSame reason they infiltrate airspace duringtraining, fly drones over airports, run submarines through ports. Testing limits and tolerance, threatening what they could do in a real attack. Creating econocic pain in retaliation for support with a strong alibi to blame. Boarding and detaining is a new escalation. How many cables cut before we consider military reaction? 3? 10? all of them?
- dundarious 10mo agoIs there a real drone issue at all? https://www.dronewatch.eu/61-european-drone-sightings-analysed-heres-what-we-know/ https://www.dronewatch.eu/61-european-drone-sightings-analys...
- fennecbutt 10mo agoJust like Trump's tariff bs, I'm starting to think that for Putin's M.O. that we should be fighting fire with fire. Why not send a couple ships to drag anchors across Russia's cables? "Oh we are but innocent fishermen" is still valid going the other way. Then when Russia inevitably seizes and imprisons the crew, the international community can do the same for every Russian controlled ship with the bare minimum of suspicion. Would be a pretty sucky mission though, so many risks of capture. But the Russian government does it because they don't care about their people and also the rest of the world is too toothless to do anything about it (until this occurrence at least, go Finland - but then they know Russia's tactics very well). Russia has been doing a "stop hitting yourself, stop hitting yourself" to the world for too long, abusing the "nice" way we desperately try to see things, pretending even when it's obvious. Like they'll do something egregious and then when the West calls them out, suddenly their political mouthpieces are all "we can't believe that the West is making this shocking and provocative accusation which is of course completely false, EU are bullies!" and then the world responds by taking a step back, pretty much every single time.
- tosapple 10mo ago-- Why not send a couple ships to drag anchors across Russia's cables? "Oh we are but innocent fishermen" is still valid going the other way. -- Then when Russia inevitably seizes and imprisons the crew Are you volunteering yourself for a vacation in a Russian gulag?
- fennecbutt 10mo agoOh, not at all. I don't have the balls or the skills for that. Though perhaps we could test some autonomous trawling vessels, you know, big tech company stuff. But as we know, software can sometimes be difficult and have...bugs... ;3
- tosapple 10mo agoThe whole bug thing is interesting in the face of them spoofing gps so willingly.
- itsthecourier 10mo agoit's like Putin decided his job is to test the limits of modern international politics
- mmooss 10mo agoIt is: Look up the theory of status quo and 'revisionist* powers, and how they interact. Russia is acting as the revisionist, very predictably in many ways. And many in the West act predictably as status quo - including not being able to fathom why anyone would revise their happy power structure (with them on top). You can see the same thing in many areas, such as race relations. The status quo is outraged and can't believe that other groups may be unhappy - after all, things work well in the status quo person's experience!
- nephihaha 10mo ago"not being able to fathom why" I see what you did there!
- mosst 10mo agoToo many warmongering, aggressive people in the comments. This is not how we get the good ending. Cooler heads prevail. You don't understand this. That's okay. It's not your fault.
- davidguetta 10mo agowe have winston churchill, specialist of international relation and war here
- lovich 10mo agoRussia is already in a state of armed aggression against Ukraine, and committing sabotage against other countries throughout Europe. Cooler heads in this case are idiotic heads. It doesn’t take two partners to start a war, it only takes one and Russia already decided. Someone in the other comments linked an article stating that Europe was doing the “unthinkable” of planning to retaliate and I was agog reading it if true. Not because Europe was going to retaliate but that they hadn’t even come up with plans over the past decade of increasing aggression from Russia. You don’t have war plans for every crazy situation your analysts and strategists can conceive of because you’re excited to use them. You have them so your state apparatus is prepared and ready to go in an unlikely emergency instead of needing to take the months to years that any large bureaucracy needs to be ready to take action.
- mmooss 10mo agoThat seems to contradict itself? Cooler heads plan carefully; hotheads act out - seek immediate emotional satisfaction without thinking of the consequences. > It doesn’t take two partners to start a war, it only takes one and Russia already decided. Wars are not acts, but the conseuqences of long chains - large graphs - of decisions often lasting decades or more. Wars come from situations where there is no other choice. The main goal of international relations policy is to create optimal scenarios, to not get caught in a situation where you have bad options or no options. Russia's 'grey zone' actions, including of course online propaganda campaigns (seriously, why wouldn't they?), are trying to create the scenarios that suit Russia best. They are preparing the political ground, and warfare is fundamentally politics (the most widely accepted maxim of warfare - see Clausewitz). For an example, people emotionally and aggressively advocating for warfare, like on this page, if widespread can set the political ground. It takes two (or more) to get into that position. It's a game of chess - checkmate isn't the result of one move.
- msie 10mo agoEffin' Russian govt, the rest of the world is too easy on them. They'll break ceasefires, they'll target non-military sites, they'll interfere with elections, they'll spread misinformation on social media, they'll lie to everyone and especially to their own citizens.
- SergeAx 10mo agoLet's play war game. Here's a life-like scenario: - Russian ship damages another cable - EU deploys military ships and planes on Baltic/North sea - Russia deploys military ships and planes of their own - EU tries to stop and seize another RU shadow fleet vessel - EU vessel denies EU demands - EU attack a vessel, trying to immobilize it - RU ships and planes attacks EU ships and planes - casualties from both sides - RU drops 10-15 MRBMs with conventional (non-nuclear) warheads onto key EU naval bases - orange clown in the White House says "this is not our war" Your move.
- rasz 10mo agomy moves https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/25/russian-cargo-ship--ursa-major-owner-sinking-mediterranean-terrorism https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/25/russian-cargo-... https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/ukraine-hits-russian-shadow-fleet-tanker-mediterranean-first-time-sbu-source-2025-12-19/ https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/ukraine-h...
- LunaSea 10mo agoMy move: The EU airforces destroy all Russian siloes, air bases, naval bases and oil / gas infrastructure. Your move.
- SergeAx 10mo agoThe EU currently has about 450 Typhoons, 230 Rafales, and 140 Gripens. It also has about 160 F-35s; let's assume that the orange clown will not shut them down remotely. They also have some older Tornadoes, Mirages, and F-16 and F/A-18. All those aircraft are fighters, not strategic bombers. Their impact is limited; their range is about 700km. The EU doesn't have a plan for how to fight without the US. Today's airstrikes should be carefully planned: planes, pilots, munitions, targets, engagement trajectories, and return trajectories. They will need time to figure out those plans. In their shoes, I would have started drafting those plans four years ago, but they still didn't. The EU will not attack nuclear siloes, for fear of nuclear retaliation. Even if they try, most of those siloes are much farther than 700 km from Russia's borders. Those siloes were built by the USSR, and the USSR knew better. The EU will use Storm Shadows/SCALPs/Tauruses. There aren't many of those in arsenals. Trying to use smart planning bombs with sub-100 km range will only make casualties 10-20 fold. The EU strikes may reach Baltic and Black Sea naval bases, some energy infrastructure (port Primorsk being the first), and some airfields. They will not get the North Sea and Pacific bases, airfields near Murmansk, Saratov, and Irkutsk, which are used now to attack Ukraine. Russia has integrated air defence, anв the shit is real, it is fight-proven, it works day and night for the last 3 years. Ask Ukrainians. EU strikes will not be very effective and will not last. I estimate it in 1500-2000 sorties, and about half of those will reach the targets. The EU will lose about 100 planes and 50 pilots. Russia will receive a blow, but will not be devastated. Russia will retaliate with new conventional MRBM strikes on the military and double-use airfields, and also factories of Gripen, Rafale, Airbus, etc. With those strikes, the EU will lose another 200 planes and most of its capacity to produce and repair them. Russia will also strike one large natural gas storage, one LPG from the Gulf comes into. Russian diversants will deliver several hits to the EU energy system, probably to large distribution hubs. The EU stocks will drop to 70%-50% of their current value. The euro will fall by 20%-30% against global currencies. Electricity, gas, and heat prices will rise 2-3 times; gasoline and diesel prices will increase 1.5-2 times. Your move.
- HPsquared 10mo agoI wonder how the insurance works in this situation.
- pointbob 10mo ago[dead]
- SubiculumCode 10mo agoMaybe it's time to cut Russia out of the West's internet altogether.
- thomassmith65 10mo agoThe half that Russia hasn't already blocked, anyways.
- jojobas 10mo agoRussians are blocked, Russia isn't.
- bjelkeman-again 10mo agoI was thinking that too, but is it even possible? Russia must have interconnects via Belarus and other countries like Turkey. Maybe China?
- SubiculumCode 10mo agoWell, I am thinking more on the lines of only our allies.aka, in territories that we could investigate if we suspect a foreign influence campaign.
- lovegrenoble 10mo agoDeja vu (Nord Stream)
- motbus3 10mo agoI understand the basics of the current conflicts, but what would be the advantage of sabotaging those cables at this moment?
- benterix 10mo agoWell, Putin doesn't always follow logic. Logically, all these provocations make Europe more united. But in his mind he's probably doing some kind of force projection and punishment for supporting Ukraine.
- aembleton 10mo agoTesting the response.
- thyristan 10mo agoI can see a few advantages: Internal Propaganda. You show to your own people, that you can cut off the enemies' communication lines easily. External Propaganda. You show to the enemies that they are vulnerable, spreading fear and doubt in their own strength. Exercises for larger operations. You train ships' crews for those kinds of maneuvers, in case you need to to it a large number of times, e.g. to cut off all baltic cables at once, cut all transatlantic cables, cut all cables to some important island like Iceland, etc. Internal Normalisation. You get the ships' crews, your population and your governance structures used to a more aggressive mode of operations. External Normalisation. You get the enemies' population and governance structures used to those kinds of pinpricks. So when the large-scale operation starts, they will ignore the first signs as "just the usual irrelevant pinpricks". Testing and mapping connectivity. When the cable goes down, you can have your spies look at which relevant infrastructure goes down at the same time.
- The_Double 10mo agoThis is one of the best, succinct lists of motivations for hybrid warfare i've seen. But i could suggest another potential benefit for russia: If russia already operates under the assumption that they are in a (cold) war with EU/NATO, and they don't care about the effects on the relationship with Finland. Then this may simply be a really low cost, high damage operation. That not only imposes the replacement cost of the cable, but also forces countries to invest in counter measures.
- indubioprorubik 10mo agoI find it hilarious, that a land-empire, trying to undo the rule of law internationally, so the rule of the strongest returns, benefits from one side upholding the rule of law- and even gets to cry about it (venezuella) and mimicry mock the international order by presenting papers with signatures (as if they mean anything to somebody who would invade another nation at whim). This self-hypnosis of walking on water while going to Takatuka, is falling apart faster then it can repair itself.
- bogzz 10mo agoI'm trying to parse this, I presume you're talking about Russia? It's a more fitting comment about USA, to the point where I am in disbelief.
- tim333 10mo agoI guess it's low level warfare - Europe supplies arms to Ukraine, Russia damages European stuff.
- justsomejew2 10mo ago[flagged]
- silexia 10mo ago[flagged]
- bigyabai 10mo agoNo, we should probably respect due process and international law. Killing the criminals is exactly what Russia wants since it means that Europe has no political or intelligence leverage over Russia. Detaining and interrogating the perpetrators is a nightmare scenario, and it's why highly-trained professionals are deployed instead of an Exocet missile.
- jgalt212 10mo agoThey should build microwave towers between the Nordics and the Baltics.