Tweet

More from @noclador

Thomas C. Theiner

@noclador

Aug 2

NATO's role in Kosovo - a short thread 🧵:

On 10 June 1999 the UNSC adopted Resolution 1244, which tasked NATO to enter Kosovo & establish a peacekeeping mission with the duties of:

• deterring renewed hostilities
• maintaining & where necessary enforcing a ceasefire

1/n

• ensuring the withdrawal & preventing the return into Kosovo of (Yugoslav) Federal & Republic military, police & paramilitary forces

russia voted Yes & Yugoslavia accepted.

50,000 troops from 🇬🇧🇩🇪🇺🇸🇫🇷🇮🇹🇳🇱🇨🇦🇺🇦🇪🇸🇧🇪🇬🇷🇹🇷🇳🇴🇩🇰🇵🇱🇫🇮🇸🇪🇦🇹🇭🇺🇵🇹🇨🇭🇷🇴🇨🇿🇧🇬🇱🇹 entered Kosovo 2 days later.

2/n

All NATO members' parliaments repeatedly voted to support KFOR, which is operationally assigned to NATO's Joint Forces Command (JFC) Naples.

Therefore talk of "NATO can't intervene if Serbia invades Kosovo unless member parliaments vote for it" is factually wrong.

3/n

Read 6 tweets

Thomas C. Theiner

@noclador

Jul 30

Olenivka POW massacre thread 🧵:

1) it wasn't a GMLRS rocket
2) it was a thermobaric weapon
3) russia staged it and did so (as usual) incompetently

Firstly: keeping POWs so close to the front violates Article 19 of the Third Geneva Convention making it a war crime.

1/n

Secondly: Olenivka is about 15 km from the frontline. Striking a target so close to the front with sparse and expensive long-range GMLRS rockets, when one could use 105 mm artillery rounds that cost around 0.4% of a GMLRS rocket makes no sense.

2/n

Thirdly: Olenivka has been a well known DNR POW and concentration camp for years (and a penal colony for decades). So much so that the wives of the POWs knew about it. One needs to be a delusional russian troll or propagandist to believe Ukraine would strike this target.

3/n

Read 15 tweets

Thomas C. Theiner

@noclador

Jul 30

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1552933475744874496

There is a lot of debate about this video as it is unclear what weapon was used... it could even have been the first use of an autonomously operating loitering munition.

The tank was definitely hit by an explosively formed penetrator (EFP) fired by a top-attack weapon.
1/4

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1552933475744874496

The weapon's trajectory rules out howitzer fired systems like SADARM, SMArt or Bonus. It's also not an anti-tank guided missile as it flies too slow and is too high above the target for an NLAW or BGM-71F TOW. The initial suspect, a M93 wide area mine doesn't fly this far.
2/4

This leaves a not publicly disclosed loitering munition carrying an EFP forming submunition.

As such submunitions scan for and attack targets fully autonomously this undisclosed loitering munition can likely be programmed to patrol an area and will automatically attack enemy
3/4

Read 4 tweets

Thomas C. Theiner

@noclador

Jul 29

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1552933475744874496

A deeper dive into this munition:

The trajectory and the top attack mode point to a US Army M93 Hornet wide-area anti-tank mine (or its russian copy PTKM-1R)... but the distance the munition flies seems to be more than 100m. It is not an BGM-71F TOW as it flies too slow for

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1552933475744874496

an ATGM and so far no country has announced that it deliverd TOW missiles to Ukraine.

Another possibility is an undisclosed loitering munition that has an EFP warhead... or it is a XM204 wide-area top attack mine that the US Army is currently introducing to replace the M93.
2/2

PS: definitely not a SMArt or Bonus round as the trajectory or these two systems is different from the one we see here.

Read 4 tweets

Thomas C. Theiner

@noclador

Jul 24

@Wikipedia

People on here still repeat the nonsense that russia's Tornado-S is a better system than M142 HIMARS... based on the two system's @Wikipedia articles...

1) All russian weapon stats are lies.
2) All russian weapon stats are lies.
3) All russian weapon stats are lies.

1/4

I will use an example with random numbers to give you an idea how russian military weapon stats come to be:

1) russia's defense industry comes up with a new weapon system - real range: 80 km, real accuracy: can hit a football field 50% of the time.
2) they report this to the
2/4

Kremlin as: range: 100 km, accuracy: can hit a football field penalty area 80% of the time.
3) Kremlin releases that as: range: 120 km, accuracy: can hit a football field goal area 100% of the time.
4) russian propaganda news then turns this into: range: 160 km,

3/4

Read 4 tweets

Thomas C. Theiner

@noclador

Jul 15

https://twitter.com/michaeldweiss/status/1548012718430466056

The F-15C is a pure air-superiority fighter... can do nothing else.

On 27 April 2022 the last of the 24 F-15C of the 493rd Fighter Squadron at RAF Lakenheath were sent back to the US to replace the oldest fighters in the six Air National Guard squadrons flying the F-15C.

1/5

https://twitter.com/michaeldweiss/status/1548012718430466056

The US Air Force doesn't publish its fighter inventory, but the assumption is that ~ 235 F-15C/D remain in flying condition:

• 6 ANG squadrons with 144 fighters
• 2 PACAF squadrons with 48 fighters in Japan
• some F-15 at the 85th & the 419th Test & Evaluation squadrons

2/5

• and some with the 550th Fighter Squadron, which is the F-15C/D training squadron

So far only one F-15EX, which will replace the F-15C/D, has been delivered. So I doubt Ukraine can pry even one F-15C or F-15D out of the US Air Force.

As for the F-15E: the USAF bought 236
3/5

Read 5 tweets

Share this page!

Thomas C. Theiner

People who liked this thread also liked...

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @noclador

Thomas C. Theiner

Thomas C. Theiner

Thomas C. Theiner

Thomas C. Theiner

Thomas C. Theiner

Thomas C. Theiner

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?