#railway blockade | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

berniesrevolution · 1 year

Photo

IN THESE TIMES

Something is stirring this spring. People in the U.S. are becoming increasingly interested in what commentators once called “the labor question,” following recent organizing victories at Starbucks, Amazon and Apple stores; well-publicized strikes of teachers, nurses and railway workers; and the unionization of staff, graduate assistants and even faculty at scores of campuses, including the recent successful strike of nearly 50,000 academic workers on the campuses of the University of California.

Evidence of this mood shift is unmistakable this spring as students, campus staff and faculty, together with unions and community allies, are coming together on or adjacent to more than 50 campuses nationwide — including ours — to engage in a remarkable national teach-in on worker rights and organizing called Labor Spring.

It has been a long while since we’ve felt this level of energy on our campuses around labor issues. The last such moment arguably crested in the second half of the 1990s. Following the election of John Sweeney to the presidency of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) in 1995, a spirit of change swept the labor movement and attracted the attention of young people. Sweeney’s union, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), had helped catalyze that spirit in the 1990s with its innovative Justice for Janitors campaign, which won significant victories for low-waged immigrants and workers of color through militant bridge blockades and similar acts of civil disobedience. Sweeney brought that spirit with him into the AFL-CIO’s leadership when he defeated Thomas R. Donahue in the first contested election in the labor federation’s history. His victory signaled a sea change in a movement that had suffered years of decline.

One of the most important features of Sweeney’s tenure was his effort to heal the lingering divisions that had developed between unions and student activists in the era of the Vietnam War. The healing of that decades-old schism paved the way for Union Summer, an effort to recruit young people to union organizing, which the AFL-CIO launched in the summer of 1996. That fall, another significant project took wing, a series of labor teach-ins at Columbia University, the University of Virginia and eight other campuses that helped electrify young people and attract them to the labor movement. Reporting on the overflow crowd that attended the Columbia teach-in, the New York Times likened its energy to that of a rock concert.

The 1996 teach-ins contributed to a remarkably fruitful period of labor activism. In their wake, an anti-sweatshop movement took shape on college campuses that gave rise to United Students Against Sweatshops and the Worker Rights Consortium to investigate and expose abuse and protect worker rights in factories around the globe. The teach-ins gave birth to campus living wage campaigns and to Scholars, Artists and Writers for Worker Justice (SAWSJ), which in turn paved the way for our organization, the Labor and Working Class History Association (LAWCHA), which was founded in 1998. Organizing on campuses also took off following the 1996 teach-ins. The United Auto Workers (UAW) won representation elections for graduate assistants at UCLA, Berkeley and six other University of California campuses in 1999, following a systemwide strike in December 1998. Then, in May 1999, the UAW filed a petition for a representation election for teaching assistants at New York University, inaugurating a long struggle to bring unionization to graduate assistants at private universities, a struggle which continues to the present day.

That period of activism was transformative. Among other things, it helped build the bridges between unions, environmentalists and critics of globalization that led to the “Teamsters and Turtles” alliance visible in the protests against the World Trade Organization during the “Battle of Seattle” in 1999 and the World Bank protests in Washington, D.C., in 2000. It also laid the groundwork for the AFL-CIO’s dramatic shift on immigration policy in 2000, when it embraced comprehensive immigration reform and began championing the cause of undocumented immigrant workers.

Unfortunately, this hopeful surge of creative, youthful energy was undercut by the events of Dec. 12, 2000 and Sept. 11, 2001, the first being the Supreme Court’s Bush v. Gore decision determining the outcome of the contested presidential election of 2000, and the second being the attacks undertaken by the followers of Osama bin Laden, which opened the door to a “War on Terror” that went on to dominate the national agenda for years. Nor would the energy of the late 1990s reemerge in the decade that followed. The housing bubble and financial crash of 2008, the subsequent Great Recession and the period of austerity that followed it created trying times for young people, educational institutions and the labor movement.

Now, however, a new and different moment is taking shape and we are seeing evidence of it on our campuses, in our students and co-workers, and among our community and labor allies. Even in the South, where most public workers lack collective bargaining rights, the United Campus Workers, a movement seeking to organize public university employees — graduate students, undergraduate employees, staff and faculty — in one wall-to-wall union, has been spreading from campus to campus.

This is why our organization, LAWCHA, has decided to promote the Labor Spring teach-ins and actions. We welcome other organizations to join with us in this effort.

(Continue Reading)

#politics #the left #in these times #organizing #organized labor #labor movement #Labor Unions #progressive movement #progressive

55 notes · View notes

tieflingkisser · 5 months

Text

Demonstrators calling for Gaza ceasefire block railway tracks in Montreal

In a press release issued ahead of the protest, organizers said their action is part of a "growing movement across the country to block railway tracks in order to interrupt Canadian support for the genocide being committed by Israel in Gaza and the increasing violence against Palestinians in the West Bank." "Israel could not commit all these crimes without the material and political support of the West, including our Canadian government. This is ethnic cleansing. This is genocide. There must be a permanent ceasefire now," reads a quote from activist Sarah Aly, who was reported to be participating in the blockade. Israel resumed its bombardment of Gaza on Friday following the expiry of a week-long truce, during which Hamas released over 100 in exchange for the release of some 240 Palestinian prisoners.

#free palestine #canada #palestine #israel #news

9 notes · View notes

bouncinghedgehog · 4 months

Text

Hagai El-Ad is a Jewish Israeli Human Rights and LGBTQ Rights advocate. He has directed the Jerusalem Open House for Pride and Tolerance, The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), and until recently B'Tselem בצלם, one of the foremost NGOs documenting human rights abuses in the West Bank. I have long admired his work. This week, he published a column in Haaretz that resonates with me stronger than but a few I've read in the past months. What distinguishes it is its nuanced treatment of history, its complex engagement of the post-colonial paradigm, and overall, its fundamental humanity. It will not make you happy if you ascribe to a straightforward de-colonization discourse. It will not make you happy if you ascribe to the idea that a Jewish state that privileges Jews above others is a historical and moral imperative and a transhistorical moral right. It will not make you happy if you see this land as only Israel. It will not make you happy if you see it as only Palestine. And yet, it also refuses any facile both-sideist kumbaya "why can't we all just get along?" primary colored peace banner. And that's why it resonates with me. It does not prescribe or imagine or envision a solution. It proposes an honest and urgent discursive space that could offer us a starting point in the ashes of an old reality that must be replaced with a new one.

Please read. Every word.

---_——————————————

'Decolonization' of Israel or 'Decisive Defeat' of Palestinians: Are These Our Only Options?

Atrocities are etched into the historical memory of both peoples. Leaders speak in real time about the "destruction of Israel" and of the "2023 Gaza Nakba." How much blood can this Earth absorb before it vomits us all out?

The political philosopher Frantz Fanon wrote that "[t]he settler's feet are never visible, except perhaps in the sea." On the eastern shore of the Mediterranean, Zionist settlers tried very hard to ensure that if footprints were to be left in the sand, it would be of their feet only. Tried and succeeded: After the Nakba, only one Palestinian village remained on the coast, Jisr al-Zarqa. Before 1948, it was possible to walk from Jisr, perhaps in bare feet, a short distance north to al-Tantura, or south to Qisarya. These Palestinian villages, as well as the rest of those on the coast, were destroyed and the large Palestinian coastal cities were emptied – from Acre and Haifa in the north, through Jaffa in the center to Majdal (now Ashkelon) in the south: Majdal, whose last Palestinian inhabitants were deported to Gaza only toward the end of 1950, when the war was long over. Or perhaps, it never was.

Today, one walking north along the coast from Jisr will have to make his way out of Israel/Palestine, through the blocked railway tunnels and the blown-up bridge between them at Rosh Hanikra/Ras al-Naqoura, and continue for about 20 kilometers toward the southern edges of Tyre, in Lebanon, to reach the first Palestinian coastal footprint: the Rashidieh refugee camp. And heading south? He will have to make his way into the Gaza Strip, of course – reaching the northern outskirts of the city of Gaza and the Al-Shati refugee camp: Shati, literally the "beach" camp, whose name indicates not only its location on the Mediterranean coast, but perhaps also bears the memory of lost beaches, those that no longer have villages (except one) and cities by their side, but rather refugee camps, the places where Palestinians will surely "die anywhere, from anything" (Fanon).

Battle tanks, and not only feet, can also leave marks in the sand. Israel captured Rashidieh in the 1982 Lebanon War (in Operation Litani in 1978, the camp was encircled) and occupied it until 1985. Whereas Shati, like the rest of the Gaza Strip, was under direct Israeli occupation from 1967 until the 2005 disengagement, and then went through repeated "rounds" of military operations – and one continuous blockade – all the way until the horrific October of 2023 when the army returned to Shati, as it did to almost the entire northern half of the Strip. What is now left of the camp? In mid-November, Haaretz reported that "[w]hen the APC stops, the hatch opens onto the Shati refugee camp. A look around reveals something that was once a street... After a short journey west, we once again have a view of the Gaza coastline. Its beauty is in stark contrast to the destruction along the entire length of the shore." At a distance of about 120 kilometers, Shati is no longer the first Palestinian community on the coast south of Jisr a-Zarqa. Truth be told, it is not clear when – if at all – it will be again.

In this manner we "replaced" – in Fanon's words – "a certain 'species' of men by another 'species' of men." History shows that when people are "replaced" by others – when colonization is carried out – atrocities are committed. This is not some theoretical, distant insight: In 1948, during that "replacement," we committed atrocities: from Deir Yassin (after the replacement: Jerusalem's Har Nof neighborhood) to Tantura (after the replacement: Moshav Dor and Kibbutz Nahsholim). And as decolonization is "quite simply" the reversal of the above, quite a few people – disgustingly – hold the opinion that the massacres, rape and other horrors of October 7 expressed such a moment of "decolonization" – and therefore are, essentially, justified.

I suppose that it is possible to accept – resignedly or resentfully – a historical fate that embraces a worldview that between the River and the Sea everything, absolutely everything, is a zero-sum game. And that forever it will be exactly so, and if not forever then until – until when exactly? Until the "decolonization" of the Jews, or until the "decisive defeat" of the Palestinians? Either possibility entails a superficial – and cruel – reading of history.

Yes, it is good to read Fanon, hear the echo of his ideas, recognize them in our local context – and to recognize, with a measure less of automatic superficiality, the differences: Palestine is not Algeria, and we are not (speaking of feet) pieds-noirs; "Who can dispute the rights of the Jews to Palestine?" (as Jerusalem Mayor Yousef al-Khalidi wrote in 1899, in a letter delivered to Herzl); Jews came here while "leaning on the British Mandate" (Jabotinsky) but we also came here as refugees while fighting the Mandate; and, above all: No other home awaits us anywhere else in the world. Jews have been walking here, sometimes barefoot, for many a generation. On this land, the seashore is not the only place where our feet are visible.

Of course, not only our feet. Decisive defeat? Operation Yoav (October 1948) resulted, in a short period of time, in the emptying of the southern coastal plain (and the northern Negev/Naqab) of Palestinians, thus doubling the population of the Gaza Strip and transforming it into a place where most people, to this very day, are refugees or their descendants.

Seventy-five years later, and the current Israeli military operation is already emptying another parcel of land of Palestinians: this time, the northern half of the Strip, while doubling the population of the southern half – and who knows if, when and to exactly where Israel will allow them to return. Indeed, it is possible to continue all this. To "fold" even more Palestinians into even less territory – not only in Gaza but everywhere: also in the West Bank and the Galilee, in Jerusalem and in the Negev. To kill even more Palestinians: In 2014 we killed hundreds of children in Gaza, now they number in the thousands. Continue to carry the "violence into the home and into the mind" of Palestinians, and to remind them (and ourselves) again and again, "that the great showdown cannot be put off indefinitely" (Fanon). All this is possible.

And indeed, the current Israeli war plan – as announced almost daily – is, definitely, to continue until "the elimination of Hamas" is completed. With respect to this plan there are those who remind us that Hamas is a Palestinian movement – an idea – and that ideas cannot be destroyed. This is, of course, true, but – and the same people often neglect to mention the following – this insight applies not only to certain ideas that are nationalist or violent, but to ideas in general. Humanistic ideas too cannot be destroyed, even if human beings who hold them as a worldview are killed.

These are dark days for millions of people. Here we are, over 15 million of us, reeling within an unending horror of death and violence. Not a single day goes by without tears. Humanistic ideas may perhaps be indestructible, but are they even relevant in such a reality? Truthfully, they are more relevant than ever – not as a means of indulging in some naive moralism, but because they genuinely express a different moral perspective, desiring of life, at the heart of which is also a measure of sober realism that was formulated as early as 1948, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected."

Anyone with eyes in his head knew that reality was heading, God forbid, toward a terrible implosion. This is how B'Tselem, the Israeli human rights organization that I directed until about six months ago, put it in 2017: "The situation wrongly called the status quo ensures one thing, and one thing only: a continued downward spiral into an ever more violent, unjust and hopeless reality. Unless a nonviolent way out of the present situation is found, the violence of the past half century might be just a preview of much worse to come. The effort to achieve a different future here is not only an urgent moral imperative, it is a matter of life and death." B'Tselem repeated these words over and over again, also in May 2021 (during Operation Guardian of the Walls): "A reality that is based on organized violence is not only immoral – it is a danger to us all… We all desire life. For every single one of us."

And no, within this realistic perspective, there is no justification for the atrocities of October 7. Yes, it is possible to engineer a reality rooted in dispossession and oppression, of a regime based on supremacy and violence, and pretend that none of this leads to an implosion – and even blame those who warned of the inevitable outcome as if they were justifying the violence. But this is hypocritical: Warning against the impending abyss is not a priori apologism for the expected crash. Rather, it is an attempt, perhaps a desperate one, to prevent it.

Humans can make choices. Therefore, we have moral responsibility. The Israelis bear responsibility for (among other things) the consequences of the long-standing policy that made it clear to Palestinians that Israel had no intention of granting them freedom or equality, a policy that sought to trample any nonviolent channel through which Palestinians tried to resist their dispossession. Israel is the one that decided that everything – except Palestinian surrender – is "terrorism." Demonstrations? Popular terrorism. The ICC in The Hague? Legal terrorism. The United Nations? Diplomatic terrorism. Sanctions? Economic terrorism. This is a continuous, arrogant, immoral and irresponsible approach, which made it clear every day anew that any attempt at nonviolent resistance was prohibited, and that Israel would act against it by force. The completely predictable outcome of all this was, and continues to be, more violence.

And even though the violent implosion was the ever-approaching abyss that was visible to all, there is a terrible and unequivocal responsibility that is shared by anyone who decided to step beyond the abyss' threshold. This is the Palestinian responsibility (among other things) for torching homes with their occupants still inside, murdering children, raping women, kidnapping families and all the other atrocities of October 7 and since that terrible day. Against such crimes there has always been and will forever be an absolute moral prohibition. The shock, the rage, the unending terrible sadness and the tears that never stop, are the human response to the trampling of the most basic norms. The shock is even more painful when there are those who try to deny the bloody facts, or when there are those who are unable to say simply that this is an atrocity, that this is a crime, that these are absolute prohibitions that have been violated time and again in Be'eri's safe rooms, on the lawns of Kfar Azza, between the houses of Nir Oz, in the fields of Re'im and the streets of Sderot and Ofakim.

The Israeli paradigm, for years now, has been to control the entire area while managing most Palestinians by way of two subcontractors: the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza. There have long been those who have said that since the establishment of the Oslo regime in the territories, Fatah, the "Movement for the Liberation of Palestine," may still be a movement but that it is certainly no longer doing much liberation. Therefore, the best thing it can do is to rebel against the paradigm and "return the keys" to Israel. At the end of the day, it was actually the other subcontractor, Hamas, which upended the paradigm. As Khalil al-Hayya, a member of Hamas' politburo, told The New York Times, the group's "goal is not to run Gaza and to bring it water and electricity and such... It did not seek to improve the situation in Gaza. This battle is to completely overthrow the situation."

Yes, the old paradigm was rotten to the core. Whoever kicked it did so with appalling cruelty. The price paid in blood is skyrocketing. And now we all live in a post-October 7 world. In Israel it is still not possible to identify all the bodies. In Gaza it is impossible to count all the bodies. Throughout all my years in B'Tselem, I kept in my heart the fear of the day when the horror would overflow, and the so-called conflict would transform into a phase so violent that not all victims could have a name or a grave. We have reached this stage. We live this horror. Deir Yassin and Gush Etzion, Sabra and Shatila, Be'eri and Gaza. Atrocities etched into the historical memory of both peoples. Leaders who speak in real time about the "destruction of Israel" and of the "2023 Gaza Nakba." How much blood can this Earth absorb before it vomits us all out?

We all desire life. For every single one of us.

#Israel-Palestine #israel #Palestine #Jews #hamas #Arabs #Palestinians #2023 war #October war

4 notes · View notes

zvaigzdelasas · 2 years

Text

On 10 August, China announced that within a year it will start a feasibility study for the ambitious Tibet-Nepal Railway project. The announcement, which came during Nepal foreign minister Narayan Khadka’s visit to China, also revealed that China will pay for the study.

The proposed 170-kilometre railway, part of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), will link Kerung in southern Tibet to Nepal’s capital Kathmandu, entering Nepal in Rasuwa district. The plan is to eventually extend the railway to India.[...]

“Technically this will be one of the world’s toughest railways to construct as it needs to cross the lofty and fragile Himalayan range, but with China’s technological prowess it is possible as they have already built railways in higher altitudes in Tibet than the proposed Nepal-China railway,” said Aman Chitrakar, spokesperson for Nepal’s Department of Railways.[...]

The Tibet-Nepal Railway project has deep roots. In 2020, China’s former ambassador to Nepal Qiu Guohong wrote in a Nepali newspaper: “Our great leader Mao Zedong was the one who sowed the seeds of the Nepal-China railway dream. During Nepal’s late King Birendra Shah’s visit to China in 1973, Mao had mentioned Qinghai Tibet railway. Even during that time Mao had thought about linking Tibet railway to Kathmandu in Nepal as he was a visionary.”[...]

In 2016, China signed a transit and transport agreement with Nepal when KP Oli, Nepal’s former prime minister, visited China in the aftermath of a trade blockade imposed by India because New Delhi disagreed with some clauses in Nepal’s new constitution. Two years later, the railway was a key agenda item when China’s President Xi Jinping visited Nepal. This March, China’s foreign minister Wang Yi visited Nepal to reiterate China’s interest in the railway project and four months later made the announcement in support of the feasibility study.

“For several reasons, India has been suspicious and over-sensitive over the China-Nepal railway, but it is both China and Nepal’s responsibility to convince India on the railway’s importance to link India and China and its mutual benefit for the region as Nepal is at best a geography that links mainland China and the South Asian subcontinent. So, if we can connect China’s railway network with India’s railway network then this could be an important transit point for the region,” former ambassador Qiu wrote in 2020.[...]

In China, some concerns have been expressed over the ecological impacts of the railway. “At a time when we are enduring extreme heat, many are concerned with the railway’s ecological impact on the world’s water tower,” says one comment on Caijing Magazine’s WeChat channel. “Railway maintenance is going to be very challenging in the Himalaya region. International relationships also depend on how we choose to act. Be cautious,” says another.

16 Sep 22

43 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 3 months

Text

1. Sex and the City? Brussels municipality vows to be first 'single-friendly' local authority

Woluwe-Saint-Pierre in Brussels has become the first municipality in Belgium (and Europe) to commit to taking single people into account in all of its policies, by evaluating the impact they have on one-person households. Read more.

2. 'Nothing changes. Now we block the country': Farmers defiant after EU talks 'failure'

After a week of traffic chaos and more than 1,300 angry farmers in tractors gathering in Brussels as the EU summit took place on Thursday, the protestors were heard by Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo and the presidents of the European Commission and Parliament. Read more.

3. What to do in Brussels this weekend: 2 - 4 February

Feeling unmotivated to leave the comfort of your sofa this weekend, or are you feeling energised but lacking creativity on what to do? Don't worry – with our wide range of activities in Brussels and beyond this weekend you'll be spoilt for choice! Read more.

4. Empty shelves: Supermarkets hit as farmers target distribution centres

Whilst the tractors that filled Brussels on Thursday have withdrawn from the capital, some groups of Belgian farmers are persisting with more targeted blocks, preventing access to ports and distribution centres, raising fears of empty supermarket shelves. Read more.

5. 'Unsafe': Nearly 2,000 truck drivers stranded in Zeebrugge as farmers block port

While the farmers' protest came to a head in Brussels on Thursday, the tractor blockades have not all disappeared. In addition to the shut-off distribution centres, the continuing blockade at the port of Zeebrugge has left some 2,000 truck drivers stranded in the area. Read more.

6. Students organise party on train to protest SNCB fare hikes

French-speaking students and trade union youth branches partied on-board a train on Thursday in protest of Belgian National Railway Company (SNCB) price hikes. Read more.

7. One in three people in Brussels cannot afford a week's holiday

Taking a short trip or two-week holiday may be commonplace for most. However, almost 2.5 million people in Belgium cannot afford to take time off – even for just one week. In Brussels, one in three people do not go on holiday. Read more.

#nunyas news

2 notes · View notes

ukrainenews · 2 years

Text

Daily wrap up July 22-23, 2022

(If this is formatted differently, sorry, I’m on mobile because I’m traveling.)

-Ukraine and Russia sign a UN backed deal to export Ukrainian grain

-Russia launches cruise missiles at Odesa the day after signing an agreement to export Ukrainian grain

-Three people were killed and 19 others were injured when 13 Russian missiles hit a military airfield and railway infrastructure in Ukraine’s central region of Kirovohrad

-Heavy fighting has been taking place in the last 48 hours as Ukrainian forces continued their offensive against Russia in Kherson province

Ukraine and Russia have signed a UN-backed deal to allow the export of millions of tonnes of grain from blockaded Black Sea ports, potentially averting the threat of a catastrophic global food crisis.

A signing ceremony at Dolmabahçe Palace in Istanbul was attended by the UN secretary general, António Guterres, and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkey’s president, who had played a key role during months of tense negotiations.

Guterres said in remarks after the deal would open up grain exports from Ukraine and the UN would work to ensure its success.

It is hoped the agreement will secure the passage of grain and essential goods such as sunflower oil from three Ukrainian ports including Odesa, even as the war continues to rage elsewhere in the country. The UN had warned that the war risked mass malnutrition, hunger and famine.

The deal is also aimed at ensuring the safe passage of Russian-made fertiliser products, essential for ensuring future high yields on crops, amid efforts to ease a global food crisis provoked by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

UN officials said they hoped preliminary shipments could begin as soon as Saturday, with the hope of reaching prewar levels of export from the three Ukrainian ports – a rate of 5m metric tonnes of grain a month – within weeks.

According to UN officials, under the agreement struck between Kyiv and Moscow:

A coalition of Turkish, Ukrainian and UN staff will monitor the loading of grain on to vessels in Ukrainian ports before navigating a pre-planned route through the Black Sea, which remains heavily mined by Ukrainian and Russian forces.

Ukrainian pilot vessels will guide commercial vessels transporting the grain in order to navigate the mined areas around the coastline using a map of safe channels provided by the Ukrainian side.

The vessels will then cross the Black Sea towards Turkey’s Bosphorus strait while being closely monitored by a joint coordination centre in Istanbul, containing representatives from the UN, Ukraine, Russia and Turkey.

Ships entering Ukraine will be inspected under the supervision of the same joint coordination centre to ensure they are not carrying weapons or items that could be used to attack the Ukrainian side.

The Russian and Ukrainian sides have agreed to withhold attacks on any of the commercial vessels or ports engaged in the initiative to transport vital grain, while UN and Turkish monitors will be present in Ukrainian ports in order to demarcate areas protected by the accord.

-via The Guardian

According to Ukraine's Operational Command “South,” Russian forces attacked the Black Sea trade port in Odesa with Kalibr cruise missiles on July 23.

Two missiles were shot down by Ukraine’s air defense, while the other two hit the port's facilities, the military said.

A minor fire broke out at the port's pumping station, but there was no significant damage to port infrastructure or grain storage facilities, Natalia Humeniuk, spokesperson for the command said. Humeniuk also said the blast waves from the attack damaged nearby homes.

The attack came a day after Russia and Ukraine signed UN-backed agreements to resume exports of Ukrainian grain through the Black Sea. The deal aimed to unblock crucial grain exports and ease fears of a looming global food crisis. It envisioned safe passage of Ukrainian grain from three southwestern ports in Odesa Oblast, including the one in Odesa.

-via Kyiv Independent

Three people were killed and 19 others were injured when 13 Russian missiles hit a military airfield and railway infrastructure in Ukraine’s central region of Kirovohrad, the regional governor has said.

A soldier and two security guards were among those killed at an electricity substation, Andriy Raikovych said on television.

Raikovych said the strikes had disrupted the electricity grid and that one district of the regional capital, Kropyvnytskyi, had been left without power as a result, Reuters reported.

Via The Guardian

Heavy fighting has been taking place in the last 48 hours as Ukrainian forces continued their offensive against Russia in Kherson province, west of the Dnipro River, British military intelligence said on Saturday.

-via The Guardian

#ukraine #russia #daily wrap up #odesa #dnipro #kirovohrad

21 notes · View notes

blueiskewl · 2 years

Photo

The Russian Navy's Humiliating Defeat 117-Years Ago 'The Battle of Tsushima'

Since Russia launched its attack on Ukraine in late February, a heavily outnumbered and outgunned adversary has handed the Russian navy several high-profile losses.

The Russians have lost at least five Raptor-class patrol boats, one Tapir-class landing ship, one Serna-class landing craft, and most notably the Moskva, a Slava-class guided-missile cruiser that was also the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet.

The losses themselves are not catastrophic for the Russian navy and are unlikely to alter the course of the war or the balance of power in the Black Sea, but they are blows to Russian prestige and come a little over a century after another historic debacle for Russia: the Battle of Tsushima, the last time a Russian navy flagship was sunk in combat.

The Japanese and Russian empires fought in the waters between Korea and southern Japan on May 27 and 28 in 1905. The battle cemented Japan's rise as an equal to Western powers and had a lasting impact on both empires.

Competing empires

Japan's overwhelming victory in the Sino-Japenese War in 1895 had stoked tensions between the Japanese and Russian empires.

Japan, equipped with an organized, modern army, pursued ambitions in Korea and China that brought it dangerously close to Russian interests, especially in Manchuria and Korea.

Of particular importance to Russia was Port Arthur — now Dalian, China — which it leased and was the Russian Empire's only warm-water Pacific port. Port Arthur became the headquarters of Russia's Pacific Fleet and the government had plans to connect it to Russia via the Trans-Siberian Railway.

Negotiations between Japan and Russia over the future of the region went nowhere, and on February 8, 1904, the Imperial Japanese Navy attacked the main part of the Russian Pacific Fleet at Port Arthur, formally declaring war hours later.

Japan gained a naval advantage relatively quickly. It fought off an attempt by the main part of the Russian Pacific Fleet to break the blockade of Port Arthur and largely defeated Russia's Vladivostok-based squadrons at Chemulpo Bay and Ulsan — victories that allowed Japan to effectively dominate the Pacific.

Unwilling to concede defeat, and with Japanese ground forces beginning a siege of Port Arthur itself, Russia's Tsar Nicholas II ordered the creation of the 2nd Pacific Squadron, which would be made up of ships from the Baltic Fleet.

Commanded by Vice Adm. Zinovy Rozhestvensky, some 40 ships — including 11 pre-dreadnought battleships, nine cruisers, and nine destroyers — composed the 2nd Pacific Squadron.

Sailing from the Baltic in October 1904, they were supposed to relieve the Pacific Fleet at Port Arthur, destroy any Japanese ships they encountered, and cut the supply lines between Japan and mainland Asia.

Russia's doomed fleet

Russia's navy had been modernized in during the latter half of the 1800s, but while the 2nd Pacific Squadron appeared strong on paper, it was not a first-rate naval force. Some of the warships were new and untested, but many were old and bordered on obsolete. Others were little more than auxiliary ships with guns mounted on them.

Russian Navy leadership was also of low quality. Many of its officers came from wealthy and connected families who simply bought their commissions. The rank-and-file sailors were not much more professional, as many of them were inexperienced conscripts.

These issues were on full display during the seven-month, 18,000-mile journey to the Pacific.

While in the North Sea near England, the fleet opened fire on British fishing trawlers, somehow thinking they were Japanese torpedo boats. The mistake killed two fishermen, injured one, and sunk one trawler while damaging four others. In the chaos, some of the Russian ships even fired on each other, causing casualties and damage.

Diplomatic maneuvering managed to prevent the British from joining the war on the side of Japan, but the Russian fleet's troubles were only beginning.

Most of the fleet sailed around Africa rather than through the Suez Canal. The longer journey took a toll on the crews, who had never experienced such a different climate or such a long time at sea. The ships themselves were also under considerable strain. During gunnery practice with a mock target towed by a cruiser, the only thing the fleet hit was the cruiser.

With no allies, the Russians couldn't dock in friendly ports, and so they had to take on more coal while at sea. Conditions on the ships deteriorated, and disease and respiratory issues killed a number of sailors.

By the time the fleet was in Madagascar in January, Port Arthur had fallen. Their mission was then changed: They were to meet the remnants of Russia's Pacific Fleet in Vladivostok before engaging the Japanese in a decisive battle.

Slaughter at Tsushima

When the Russian ships finally reached the Tsushima Strait on the night of May 26, 1905, Rozhestvensky attempted to slip through unnoticed. Unfortunately for him, a patrolling Japanese vessel had spotted one of his ships.

Even more unfortunately, the Russian ship mistakenly believed the Japanese vessel was a lost Russian ship and signaled that more Russian ships were nearby.

With the location of his enemy confirmed, Japanese Adm. Tōgō Heihachirō's Combined Fleet — which included four modern battleships, over 20 cruisers, 21 destroyers, and 43 torpedo boats — set out to meet them.

On the morning of May 27, the fleets made contact. Before the firing began, Tōgō hoisted a signal flag that conveyed a predetermined message to his fleet: "The Empire's fate depends on the result of this battle, let every man do his utmost duty."

The ensuing battle was a slaughter. In addition to better training, discipline, and experience, the Japanese were equipped with modern armor-piercing rounds that tore the Russian ships apart.

By the end of the day, the Japanese had sunk four Russian battleships. Imperator Aleksandr III sank with its entire crew of over 700 sailors, while Borodino sank with all but one of its more than 800 crew members.

The flagship, Knyaz Suvorov, sank with all but 20 officers, while about half of Oslyabya's crew went down with the ship. The Japanese sunk a number of cruisers and destroyers as well.

As night fell, the survivors attempted to make it to Vladivostok under cover of darkness. Tōgō's destroyers hunted them down, picking off two more battleships and several other warships. By the following afternoon, most of the survivors surrendered.

Lost prestige

Russian losses were immense: 21 ships sunk or scuttled, and seven captured. Only three ships reached Vladivostok, though six others made it to neutral ports in China, the Philippines, and Madagascar.

The Japanese killed over 4,000 Russian sailors were killed and captured almost 6,000. The Japanese lost only three torpedo boats with just 117 killed and about 500 wounded — including a young Isoroku Yamamoto, mastermind of the attack on Pearl Harbor, who lost two fingers in the battle.

The Russian navy's prestige never recovered after Tsushima. It saw little major action in World War I, being unable to rebuild to the same grand scale. The Soviet Navy also only saw limited action in World War II and never truly proved itself during the Cold War, though Soviet submarines were a constant concern for NATO navies.

Today, the Russian navy boasts a smaller, more modern fleet that focuses on green-water operations rather than high-seas campaigns, but its surprising losses against Ukraine show it has yet to regain the dominance it lost a century ago.

By Benjamin Brimelow.

#The Russian Navy's Humiliating Defeat 117-Years Ago 'The Battle of Tsushima'#The Sino-Japenese War #japan #russia #ukraine #battle #fighting #naval battle #naval ships #long reads

9 notes · View notes

yaboybats · 1 year

Note

(ANON hands to YABOYBATS a coupon with the label "For one post about warship design, 1863-1910")

Good news, this is a buy one get [UNKNOWN] free!

Imma start with ironclads and keep going until I run out of things to say.

So! It's the 1860s. The Industrial Revolution (and its consequences) have already happened, the Bessemer process has made steel and high quality refined iron easier to create than ever, and steam engines are powering all sorts of things.

Warships however... still look an awful lot like your classic age of sail multi-decked monstrosity. Because they are! Outside of the introduction of rifled cannons and explosive shells, things really haven't changed much. In fact, quite a few admirals were against the use of explosive shells since they made outright destroying a vessel from range instead of conducting honorable boarding actions much more possible. (it is very difficult to sink something less dense than water by poking holes in it) The main method of steam propulsion is paddle wheels, which are great for river boats, not so much for warships. Restricts firing arcs and is positioned in such a way that it's very vulnerable to getting cannonballed into scrap quite fast.

So that leaves us with wooden warships with sails and broadsides. Broadsides were a good way of putting as much fire in one direction as possible, but only worked sideways. (Sides of ships are broad.) Sails restrict how you can, well, sail. The wind is a fickle mistress.

So where do you go from here? Well, not too long ago, the british had the idea of sticking iron on the side of barges they were using for shore bombardment. As it turns out, iron is a lot less explodey than wood. The french had the idea of doing this to a proper warship (called the Gloire) and the british, always one to one up the french, made their own. These were still generic sailing ships, just with iron armor on the sides. Iron cladding, you could say. Ironclads!

These ships, to be frank, weren’t that great. They were still wooden sailing ships with broadsides and had quite a lot less firepower than their contemporaries owing to their increased weight.

The americans, busy with their civil war, had some ideas. I will broadly classify these as casemate and monitor designs.

The confederacy, desperate to break the union blockade, had to get weird. Using captured and homemade hulls, they slapped on railway iron hulls. The most famous of these designs was the C.S.S. Virginia. This casemate design solved several of the above problems. It had a propellor, broadsides with swivel guns (guns with variable mounting. In this case multiple firing ports offset at angles on the bow and stern), and casemate armor. This is sloped armor with firing ports. It also had a ram, which didn’t do much, though that didn’t stop it from becoming popular.

It proved devastatingly effective, causing the greatest loss of life in the US navy until pearl harbor at its first and only showing, the battle of hampton roads. Only the smokestack wound up suffering significant damage after combat with an entire fleet of wooden sailing vessels.

Casemate vessels were used by both sides. The union obviously had more, and mostly used them for shore bombardment, much like the original british vessels.

The monitor design is much more interesting. So named for the first such vessel, the U.S.S. Monitor. The Monitor featured the first gun turret put to sea. It was a low and flat ship, other than retractable smokestacks, an armored “pilothouse” where the ship was steered and captained, and the turret itself. The goal was that the turret could fire in any direction while the ship can have any heading. They ended up unable to fire over the pilothouse because it deafened the captain and didn’t fire over the smokestacks.

The union made a great many monitors (some super-monitors had multiple turrets for some ungodly reason). They weren’t very seaworthy, but they were far more advanced than… anything else in the world.

After all this, everyone realized that propellor driven ironclads with a turret was a great idea. Except some dude in england who did a hybrid sail ironclad with the turret in the middle deck. It sank and he died. He deserved it. Fucking moron.

From here until the pre-dreadnought era in the 90s, everyone is trying everything all at once. Shit gets wild. People love rams. People don’t love torpedoes even though they SHOULD. Guns get bigger and quicker firing. Ships gets dramatically weirder until steam engines stop sucking as much. The united states really like monitors for some reason.

Part two will cover important things like weapon development around this time because that feeds into a lot of the other stuff needed for pre-dreadnoughts and dreadnoughts.

#ship posting

3 notes · View notes

cockysassy · 1 year

Note

A new Search and Rescue Centre is being built on the Island of Sodor as a base of operations for Harold, Rocky and a new lifeboat named Captain. Special, strong, deep-red Jobi wood from Hiro's homeland is being used to make the Centre. All the engines are very excited and all of them want to help deliver the Jobi wood to the Rescue Centre. Frustrated at being teased by Thomas for not being a steam engine, Diesel decides to prove his superiority over the steam engines by taking the Jobi wood to the Rescue Centre himself and races down the tracks. Thomas sees that Diesel is going too fast and chases after him. The chase leads to Thomas saves Diesel from falling over the edge of the unfinished bridge overlooking the Rescue Centre, but the Jobi wood crashes into the sea below. Now the Rescue Centre cannot be built.

As a reward for his daring rescue, Thomas is allowed to visit a Search and Rescue Centre on the Mainland. He is then told there is no room on the steam boat, but Thomas notices a raft behind the boat and asks to be carried on it. Thomas says goodbye to his friends at Brendam Docks and heads across the sea to the Mainland. That night the raft carrying Thomas becomes separated from the steam boat and Thomas ends up alone and stranded on the mysterious Misty Island - a wild and wonderful island with a multitude of secret hideouts, rickety tracks and bridges. Thomas discovers that the island has its own railway and meets the three engines, known as the "Logging Locos", who run it - Ferdinand, Bash and Dash. Although they offer him to join them, he rejects them out of fear of them and attempts to look for a way off the island. Meanwhile, out at sea, Harold and Captain carry out a search party to look for Thomas as the Fat Controller rallies the engines to look for Thomas on Sodor.

Thomas later tries to go to the logging locos for help, though they are angry at him for rejecting them. Thomas also notices that Misty Island has a plentiful supply of the rare Jobi wood and attempts to try and take them back to Sodor, but has trouble dealing with the loading crane Ol' Wheezy and uses the last of the oil to try and (unsuccessfully) use it on the other machine, Hee-Haw. Despite this, the others help Thomas get the Jobi Wood and he attempts to find his way back to Sodor with the logging locos and uncovers a tunnel that connects the two islands.

Thomas decides to go through the tunnel back to Sodor, but he and the Logging Locos get trapped after the tunnel falls in and they run out of fuel. Thomas however manages to make smoke signals Salty told him about. After being spotted by Percy, the Fat Controller, James, Edward and Gordon sail to Misty Island in hopes of finding Thomas while Percy and Whiff go through the tunnel.

Meanwhile, Thomas gets upset about how what he'd done. The Logging Locos however comfort him for what he did and laugh with him about how they were initially from the mainland until they were sent away for being naughty. They are soon rescued as Percy and Whiff come to the blockade, break through to Thomas and they all puff back to Sodor. Thomas introduces Bash, Dash and Ferdinand to Sodor. After finding out that the Fat Controller, Edward, Gordon and James are on Misty Island, Thomas rushes back there again and finds them to the delight of everyone.

After the Logging Locos are given the Sodor treatment at the Steamworks, they help to build the Rescue Centre. They finish it in time and it is soon opened, and the Misty Island Tunnel is restored so the engines can visit anytime. The Fat Controller welcomes the Logging Locos to Sodor and all the engines laugh and celebrate with their new friends.

In the last scene, Diesel 10 rolls up on the mountain ledge, sniggers and glares down at the engines laughing with their new friends at the Search and Rescue Centre, remarking that they will laugh on the other side of their boilers soon...

Why are you doing this???

#anonymous #asks

2 notes · View notes

jammyjams1910 · 1 year

Note

I need this as a bedtime story

2 notes · View notes