Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rroff said:
Crimea is a hugely complicated one - removing Russia from it significantly erodes their ability to invade Ukraine again in the future and denying them the port facilities would be a huge blow. On the other hand if Russia dig in it would be vastly costly to attack and conversely once taken it would be hard to defend against Russia.

Stuff like HIMARS does change the equation somewhat compared to earlier in the war - but it is likely Western support would start to wane once the main territory of Ukraine was retaken making an assault on Crimea even more costly if defended.
Click to expand...
Attacking Crimea while much of Russia's forces were occupied elsewhere would be the play though Ukraine would have to be in a position to advance fairly quickly from Melitopol/Nova Khakovka/Across the Dnieper on boats as well as dropping Kerch bridge (the railway being the principle target) to make reinforcement only possible via limited barges/other parts of the front thus opening up other avenues to advance/target shifting forces.

Leaving Crimea last doesn't seem sensible to me if Ukraine wants to retake it.
 
Last edited:
RxR said:
A tactical nuclear (or nuke fallout zone) fence around the stolen territories was what I was thinking earlier in the week. After listening to Bronk I realise it would need about 500 little nukes to do the trick - so its unlikely.
Click to expand...
Or one “if we can’t have it nor can you” nuke in crimea.
 
Crimea would be a tough nut to crack considering there are only 2 crossings and they are very narrow, making it easy for poorly trained conscripts to defend and fire pre-sighted artillery. Would require air superiorty in the least I think.
 
Last edited:
Minusorange said:
www.gov.uk

The UK's nuclear deterrent: what you need to know

www.gov.uk www.gov.uk

I would imagine any defence we do have in place, it could be easily saturated by a large enough strike, seems our largest defence is the threat of striking back, but that defence only works if the people wanting to strike us first are not insane
Click to expand...
And the people on the ground in russia aren’t insane.. nor is the FSB.. nuked russia=no FSB
 
RxR said:
A tactical nuclear (or nuke fallout zone) fence around the stolen territories was what I was thinking earlier in the week. After listening to Bronk I realise it would need about 500 little nukes to do the trick - so its unlikely.
Click to expand...

Nukes don't work like Chernobyl though, the area around Chernobyl will be radioactive for ages and a no-go zone. The biggest issue with nuclear fallout from a bomb is the immediate hours and days afterward, staying sheltered to avoid radiation sickness.

Just 7 hours after a blast and the radiation falls to 10% of what it was, 48 hours after a blast and it's at 1%. So even being able to shelter for a couple of days or so in a basement of a big building or in an underground station etc.. makes a difference.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki have been completely rebuilt, they're not no-go zones.
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
Yup, I think Crimea is very much dependent on Western support. It's certainly quite plausible Ukraine could take it back with continued support, but with Putin still in power and throwing resources into this war then it would be very hard otherwise and there could be pressure for a peace deal at some point before then.

I guess one scenario that could make it more likely would be Ukraine getting further big wins in the south; Russian forces in Kherson and Zaporoska oblast collapsing and that prompts serious unrest in Russia or even Putin being deposed. IF Russia has a change of leadership or serious unrest or even a civil war/breakup to contend with then Ukraine can very plausibly keep pushing and drive Russians out of Crimea.




I'm in two minds about the bridge, on one hand it would be great to see and would really really upset Putin and cause Crimeans to panic, on the other hand, depending on the progress made, that might be their main escape route, you perhaps want hundreds of thousands of Russians to flee over that thing.

One half-way solution might be to blow up the rail bridge only, which achieves the goal of making resupply far more difficult (Russians relying on trains), they're then forced to stretch out their already difficult logistics via trucks.
Click to expand...
Putin may blow the bridge behind the defenders to prevent them retreating.
 
Disappointing to see Elon's latest Tweet - even the people around Kharkiv have voted with their feet to kick Russia out in this war - that should tell him something. The only place he has some kind of point is Crimea and even that is far from a straight forward one.

There was a certain amount of support for Russia around Severodonetsk/Lysychansk I think partly because the people there didn't understand the need for how the Ukraine army was acting - strangely enough they changed their opinion after getting a dose of living under Russian control...
 
Rroff said:
Disappointing to see Elon's latest Tweet - even the people around Kharkiv have voted with their feet to kick Russia out in this war - that should tell him something. The only place he has some kind of point is Crimea and even that is far from a straight forward one.

There was a certain amount of support for Russia around Severodonetsk/Lysychansk I think partly because the people there didn't understand the need for how the Ukraine army was acting - strangely enough they changed their opinion after getting a dose of living under Russian control...
Click to expand...

What's he even wang-ing on about?

 
One of life`s mystery's is Musk, Managed to pull the eyes over so many people in that he does the work.. Used to enjoy saying No to him :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom