War

CCGNZ

Well-Known Member
Did anybody other than Putin predict this would be over in a year? I thought it might when Russia invaded but that was dispelled after the first couple of weeks. Ukraine showed its ability to fight and Russia's inability to do anything other than lose men and equipment. The largest supplier of tanks to Ukraine is Russia. I've heard military analysts say same as you that the US Abrams isn't a good fit in Ukraine's infrastructure or military.

What Ukraine really needs is air support from NATO. I don't know if it's being considered by NATO nations but air support would just about end Russia's ability to fight in Ukraine.
There's no doubt that NATO would rule the sky,and the reason it isn't happening is,"what is the Russian response", I've noticed a interesting lack of cyber activity which was an implication that had the west worried concerning support for Ukraine initially,is Russia holding back playing that card in reserve?.Flying sorties over Ukraine may trigger a massive cyber event once the first SAM system is hit or the first Russian aircraft is downed.That's just one possible scenario,Russian nuclear forces will be on hair trigger alert and if they reflect Russia's performance so far that's pretty frightening(accidental launches etc.).Putin may even detonate a nuke atmospherically as a warning.I'm for helping Ukraine but there are really rational reasons for only getting involved incrementally. Opportunities to help Ukraine in the air have been lost through expectations,if only we'd known on Feb 24 that Ukraine could hang in there to the point we are at today,they'd probably be introducing F-16's w/trained Ukranian pilots strapped in into the fray right about now,hindsight's a great benefit though,isn't it?
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
Russia changed it tactics and massed troops for the attack. Ukraine was late sending in reinforcements. You may have noticed almost all the rest of the line had much less fighting while this was happening.
they can't afford to be late...they've been doing an unbelievable job, but that is the kind of mistake that could turn the tide, not only in a battle, but in a war. i still have great confidence that Ukraine will beat russia, but it isn't going to be quick, or painless.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
Give him asylum in The Hague. This guy went very far north to get out of Russia.

any officer of wagner is fucking guilty of war crimes. no fucking question...
investigate that fuck thoroughly, make sure he is charged with everything he deserves to be charged with.
in the incredibly unlikely event that he is clean, good for him for getting the fuck out.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
There's no doubt that NATO would rule the sky,and the reason it isn't happening is,"what is the Russian response", I've noticed a interesting lack of cyber activity which was an implication that had the west worried concerning support for Ukraine initially,is Russia holding back playing that card in reserve?.Flying sorties over Ukraine may trigger a massive cyber event once the first SAM system is hit or the first Russian aircraft is downed.That's just one possible scenario,Russian nuclear forces will be on hair trigger alert and if they reflect Russia's performance so far that's pretty frightening(accidental launches etc.).Putin may even detonate a nuke atmospherically as a warning.I'm for helping Ukraine but there are really rational reasons for only getting involved incrementally. Opportunities to help Ukraine in the air have been lost through expectations,if only we'd known on Feb 24 that Ukraine could hang in there to the point we are at today,they'd probably be introducing F-16's w/trained Ukranian pilots strapped in into the fray right about now,hindsight's a great benefit though,isn't it?
or it could be that our cyber security guys are better than theirs, have better equipment and training, and work better together to stop their efforts...and that is why there hasn't been much action on the cyber security front?
maybe the russian cyber security forces have been busy trying to counter attacks from our guys, and from Anonymous, and from Ukrainian cyber security, and from independents who are chipping in, and that's why they haven't had time to create many problems?
 
Last edited:

CCGNZ

Well-Known Member
or it could be that our cyber security guys are better than theirs, have better equipment and training, and work better together to stop their efforts...and that is why there hasn't been much action on the cyber security front?
maybe the russian cyber security forces have been busy trying to counter attacks from out guys, and from Anonymous, and from Ukrainian cyber security, and from independents who are chipping in, and that's why they haven't had time to create many problems?
Could be,their intel service(thought Ukranian gov. was highly penetrated at outset of invasion)has underwhelmed,I was mainly offering up potential reasons that deter NATO from getting involved in Ukranian airspace. I'm pleasantly surprised that the west has been able to steadily up the ante in lethal equipment to Ukraine without the conflict escalating. I'm of the opinion that Nato aircraft in the skies of Ukraine probably pushes things to a level that would make the world tremble.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
Could be,their intel service(thought Ukranian gov. was highly penetrated at outset of invasion)has underwhelmed,I was mainly offering up potential reasons that deter NATO from getting involved in Ukranian airspace. I'm pleasantly surprised that the west has been able to steadily up the ante in lethal equipment to Ukraine without the conflict escalating. I'm of the opinion that Nato aircraft in the skies of Ukraine probably pushes things to a level that would make the world tremble.
i'm a little crazier than most...i'm at the point where i would just go ahead and force the issue. i would just let NATO fight in Ukraine openly. if poutin' doesn't like it, go ahead and do something about it. would more Ukrainian lives be lost in a tactical nuke strike? or a drawn out war of attrition that lasts for years?
if putin uses a nuke or a chemical weapon, would NATO have the guts to attack then? i'm not so sure...and then what happens? emboldened by not being attacked, he drops more...
 

CCGNZ

Well-Known Member
i'm a little crazier than most...i'm at the point where i would just go ahead and force the issue. i would just let NATO fight in Ukraine openly. if poutin' doesn't like it, go ahead and do something about it. would more Ukrainian lives be lost in a tactical nuke strike? or a drawn out war of attrition that lasts for years?
if putin uses a nuke or a chemical weapon, would NATO have the guts to attack then? i'm not so sure...and then what happens? emboldened by not being attacked, he drops more...
Wow Roger, I guess,Hey if your strategy were successfully implemented w/no repercussions you'd be the pre-eminent Statesman of our time. I'm of the mind that if we slaughter the Russian airforce and pummel their positions in Ukraine,Putin would consider the existence of the sovereign Russian state to be facing extinction,prompting a kick the chessboard over,"I lose everyone loses" Nuclear response targeting everything and anything or I FKD up and put a pistol in his mouth. If I had to bet I'd say option A is more likely,but hey you never know until you really know.I'm just a guy on a chrome book sitting in a parking lot.LOL
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
The spooks from most western countries thought Russia would roll them in a couple three weeks. We only gave help after they showed us how weak the Russians actually were.
We gave enough aid for them to blunt the attack, they traded space for time and stretched out the Russians logistical lines of support and took advantage of all their mistakes including 5 simultaneous lines of attack dividing their forces. After they were driven back much more aid to hold them off poured in and once it looked like they could beat the Russians more still came in and is continuing to as western resolve matched Ukrainian. People realized it is a geopolitical and military bargain that will change the map of Europe and Asia. I think some of this slow approach to aid by some is an attempt to suck as much of Vlad's army as we can into Ukraine and destroy it, make the fucker think he has a chance. Austin and Blinken said early in the war the idea was to break Russian military power and ability to project force, until Joe told them to STFU!

Joe has got Vlad by the balls here and he ain't gonna let him go without a mutiny at the Pentagon, NSA and State Dept! :lol:
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
i'm a little crazier than most...i'm at the point where i would just go ahead and force the issue. i would just let NATO fight in Ukraine openly. if poutin' doesn't like it, go ahead and do something about it. would more Ukrainian lives be lost in a tactical nuke strike? or a drawn out war of attrition that lasts for years?
if putin uses a nuke or a chemical weapon, would NATO have the guts to attack then? i'm not so sure...and then what happens? emboldened by not being attacked, he drops more...
I still say some of this was to suck more and more of Vlad's army into Ukraine and destroy it, make him think he could win. Neither spook or nuke, but trap him and strangle him while bleeding him white, at some point that became part of a bigger plan. A longer war would wean Europe off Russian energy while sanctions destroy their economy with the help of plentiful allies. It might not have started out like that, in the beginning it was wait and see, then the Pentagon saw the situation made a report and it went from there.

IMHO it worked out great (not so much for the Ukrainians) and Russia is on the ropes and will lose this war in humiliation while Ukraine will rapidly rise from the ashes. The Ukrainians will have a very strong liberal democratic country with bright prospects and long term security with Russian military power destroyed, along with their economy and major revenue source. If it ended too quickly with a Russian withdrawal they would have remained a future threat and stifled their economy and prosperity any way they could. This way finishes them off for good and uses up all their massive reserves of arms and ammo, along with a lot of their manpower. The way the Russian army operates and treats it's troops only a moron would join it after this fiasco, once burned twice shy.

The Ukrainians are fighting for their future and doing it this way will insure future security and maximum allied future support. They are playing by the rules with the prospects of seized Russian money being given to them by an international legal process, enough money to pay for the cost of the war's physical damage and even pay back loans and aid. Then there is the oil and gas they will be now free to develop and sell to Europe, displacing the Russians, with Crimea comes control of the Black sea, along with Turkey
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Beavers are defending the Belarus border for Ukraine, that's what they are saying. Our national rodent strikes again!


Ukraine War: Is Russia pushing Belarus to join the war?

86,306 views Jan 16, 2023 #dnipro #ukraine #skynews
Belarus has started joint air force drills with the Russian military, describing it as "purely defensive".

It comes amid growing concerns that Russia is pushing Belarus to join the war in Ukraine and stretch Kyiv's forces.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member

Retired general shares what he thinks Ukraine should do after Dnipro attack

62,763 views Jan 16, 2023 #CNN #News
CNN military analyst Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling (Ret.) tells CNN's Kate Bolduan what type of missiles he believes Russia used in its attack on an apartment in Dnipro, Ukraine, and what Ukraine's next move should be.
 

injinji

Well-Known Member
i'm a little crazier than most...i'm at the point where i would just go ahead and force the issue. i would just let NATO fight in Ukraine openly. if poutin' doesn't like it, go ahead and do something about it. would more Ukrainian lives be lost in a tactical nuke strike? or a drawn out war of attrition that lasts for years?
if putin uses a nuke or a chemical weapon, would NATO have the guts to attack then? i'm not so sure...and then what happens? emboldened by not being attacked, he drops more...
I Ukraine does the work themselves, they will be one of the strongest counties in Europe after this is all over. If NATO were to do it, that would not be the case.

But if there is WMD used, NATO will clean up all the Russians in Ukraine in short order. We wouldn't go into Russia because we don't want the country to break up. Or another way of saying that is we do not want loose nukes.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
I Ukraine does the work themselves, they will be one of the strongest counties in Europe after this is all over. If NATO were to do it, that would not be the case.

But if there is WMD used, NATO will clean up all the Russians in Ukraine in short order. We wouldn't go into Russia because we don't want the country to break up. Or another way of saying that is we do not want loose nukes.
The Kh-22 is quite a heavy weapon to expend on a residential target. It is designed to hurt or kill capital ships like aircraft carriers. I wonder what strategic benefit Russian command thinks its use in this way will confer.
 
Top