War
- Thread starter captainmorgan
- Start date
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
With its metric ton of RDX.
BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
hey igor let me borrow you walkie
it was right here a minute ago
meanwhile
it was right here a minute ago
meanwhile
printer
Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Velshi: Ukraine needs all of the aid the West can give—right now
1,487 views Jan 16, 2023 #msnbc #ukraine #russia
“Western governments need to figure out what the maximal amount of support they plan to eventually give Ukraine might be—and give it all now, when it can matter,” says Ali Velshi. “They cannot win this war with six weeks of support at a time. They need all the aid the West is prepared to give, and they need it now.”
injinji
Well-Known Member
I'm guessing they had not intended this, but the one effect it has had is to get western countries willing to give more arms. So the 40 or 50 folks who died, may save thousands of lives down the line.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
but would NATO go in if putin used a nuke? i'm not so sure.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Yes. Which makes command’s calculus opaque to me. A six-ton missile with a terminal speed near Mach 4. and with an aiming error considerably less than the beam of a capital ship, like you all see is downside.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
If Putin used a nuke, I believe Nato going in fast and hard is effectively assured. Ignoring such a provocation would lead to very bad things for Europe’s future.
If he throws that particular gauntlet, it’s swords out and the end of that state. If he does the stupid thing again, it will be response in kind. Not cities, but mineral extraction sites. Russia will fragment into many third-world countries.
China might be the big winner with access to what they so sweetly call the Northern Resource Area.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
it makes me wonder how accurate the estimates of russia's remain missile stockpile are?
if this is accurate, why are they throwing a missile like that instead of something smaller and cheaper?
View attachment 5248789
[/QUOTE]
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
i don't have your confidence...the EU leaders have hemmed and hawed about what they can or would give Ukraine that wouldn't upset putin too much...i don't put a lot of faith in placator's willingness to wage war.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
This is what Russian war crimes look like and why the Ukrainians have little sympathy for the thousands of Russians they are killing every week and they won't stop until the Russians are driven from their land. If we want the war to continue, then don't give the Ukrainians what they need to end it, because the Russians won't unless driven out in utter defeat and humiliation, a broken army and nation. Whatever Vlad has left he will throw in and when it it is gone, so will he, hopefully out a window.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
It depends on if they used one on a city or to "light the way" for their offensive in the north using a tactical nuke on the battlefield. Both would have dire consequences for Russia and I wouldn't rule anything out. We have no idea of America's stealth strike capabilities using nukes or what other options are on the table. However NATO airpower in Ukraine and the destruction of whatever Russian forces were there would be the first item of business. Then taking Kaliningrad by conventional forces, go ahead and try and nuke us. But that would just be the beginning, Uncle Sam would open the warehouse doors to the Ukrainians and everything would be on the table, including providing Ukraine with or stationing nuclear weapons there. The Russia's would be gone or dead there in a week, including Crimea.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
you seem so certain...i am not certain. i don't know if the EU leaders of NATO can be trusted to attack when they finally satisfy their own conditions for it, or if they will waffle and cry about not wanting to escalate things further. at best, i'm considering it a 50/50 chance. i see it as much more likely that if putin does use nukes or chemical weapons, that the US will end up intervening alone, which will leave us open to a lot of criticism from the rest of the world, while NATO sits on it's hands, until shamed into participating, after the actual danger is diverted directly to US troops
[/QUOTE]
Putin is just emptying out the cellar,he's lobbing shit at Ukraine like like a hoard being thrown in a dumpster,S-300 AA missiles are also being used on buildings,it's a TNT free for all.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
i was assuming something that large would be expensive, but the kh-22 is pretty cheap comparatively, at 1 mill each....guess that's why they're using them up, when a kaliber cost 6.5 mill, and an iskander cost 3 mill.
injinji
Well-Known Member
Poland could do it by themselves. They seem eager to give it a shot. But President Joe Rob would not hem and haw.
But also keep in mind the longer the war goes on, the weaker Russia will be. It would be beneficial for Europe to string this along for a couple three years. To just before civil war breaks out in Russia.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Vlad using nukes with out a shocking response would be a fatal error and one not likely to happen any objections would be ignored, the range of responses has already been agreed upon most likely. Try and keep the Poles from taking Kaliningrad if the Russians use nukes in Ukraine. It would be an unimaginable shit storm unleashed on them if the Russians even used a tactical one on the battlefield. This has been made very clear to the Russians in private conversations with the US state department, immediate NATO membership and nukes stationed on Ukraine's border a few couple of hundred miles from Moscow would be the most likely result.