You don’t get a shockwave like that from fuel. Beirut port had a similar explosion when a warehouse load of fertiliser went bang. It literally erased part of the port.
So it probably was an ammo dump or fertiliser store.
Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
You don’t get a shockwave like that from fuel. Beirut port had a similar explosion when a warehouse load of fertiliser went bang. It literally erased part of the port.
So it probably was an ammo dump or fertiliser store.
Poor guy, he was fine until he watched Putin's parade - I know the parade was total jank but I didn't think it was so bad he'd have a heart attack over it
Mi could be wrong, I'm not expert but I've seen a few videos of ammo storage facilities blow up in the war and generally the smoke that goes up tend to look more grey. It's usually when carbon burns that you get a thick black smoke - that doesn't mean it wasn't an ammo depot but the amount of black smoke suggests to me at least that it's mostly fuel/oil that exploded
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 16,008
- Location
- Fareham
Think ammo depots tend to have a lot of secondary explosions as well as the ammo cooks off, those comments are saying likely spent soviet-era rocket fuel storage site.
Some sort of fuel depot gets my vote so far anyway!
Yeah, I'd be inclined to agree, it dosnt look like other bulk munitions explosions i've seen. There is no doubting that Russia have hit something substantial. However, from the footage we have seen so far it looks less "kinetic" for want of a better description. Munitions explosions I have seen previously have always looked more dramatic. This looks slower burning, blacker fuel/oily/carbon smoke type of burn.
If it is indeed the old ammo dump to the west of Khmelnytskyi, could very well be stocks of fuels/chemicals like has been suggested. Google earth shows very large quantities of what looks like externally stored barrels (possibly precursors/chemicals). It also shows what seems like it may be a munitions factory to the north side of the complex. What has been hit remains to be seen.
Google Earth
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 7,166
People really need to learn some respect. Whatever your views on this current conflict, this dumping on Russian V Day is incredibly disrespectful, especially considering they did the vast majority of the heavy lifting in WW2 against the Nazis.
Firstly, with respect to your comment, I am no military expert, but I suspect the 'heavy lifting' against the nazi's (i.e. losing so many men), was down to massively underwhelming training and technical armaments versus the Germans. They lost so many because their tactics didn't care for human life including their own men. Much like Britain's world war one tactics that Black Adder mocked of storming from the trenches into heavy machine gun fire, over and over.
Secondly, **** 'em. They have shown zero care for human life 80 years later, and deserve to be mocked. (Edit: I respect those that sacrificed against the Nazi's, but this Ukraine thing is a whole new level of BS. It is literally them trying to land grab JUST LIKE the Nazi's were trying to do. Excect with a vastly inferior armed forces).
Last edited:
Russia didn't really do 'most of the heavy lifting' in WWII. Western forces were fighting in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Western Europe, Central Europe, and Eastern Europe. Russia fought mainly in Eastern and Central Europe, then decided she wanted to hang around and steal other people's countries just like the Nazis had done.
Russia's primary contribution was throwing poorly trained cannon fodder at the Nazis, which tied up a lot of Hitler's resources and kept him fighting on multiple fronts. The only reason people think Russia did most of the heavy lifting is because she lost a lot of people. But that's not the same thing.
The real heavy lifting was done by the West. Russia was the drunk guy who enters the fight late, punches out a couple of guys, passes out after losing a lot of blood, then wakes up and steals everyone's drinks while they're talking to the cops.
Last edited:
Yeah not to diminish what the Soviets did to bring WW2 to a close but everyone had their part to play in bringing that war to a close the way it did and things would have gone very differently otherwise. Russia would probably not have been able to come back from the back foot without other stuff going on.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 9,715
- Location
- newcastle
Wow, your really defending a bunch of dirty murderous nazi’s, any credit they built up during WW2 has now long gone, **** them
Perhaps you should go and read some history books, you might learn that they helped the Nazis arm up and invaded Poland, without their help it could have been very different..oh and then they screwed Eastern Europe over for decades after they 'won' and 'liberated' them.
Some good ones about the rape of Berlin...but yes we need to be respectful lolz
Last edited:
Edit: I felt it worth elaborating a fair bit.
A brief history lesson on why Russia were never the good guys in WWII. Russia helped invade Poland as part of their pact with Germany. Russia did to countries like Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Finland what the Nazis had done to Austria and Czechoslovakia. Those small countries were effectively bullied into becoming Russian states and then undesirables were eliminated (that’s a polite way of putting it).
Their tactics worked on Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia because they were too weak to do anything about it. Finland resisted and in early 1940 we had the so called winter war. In fact when Russia did this to Finland, Britain and France were ready to intervene but Sweden would not allow their forces safe passage to reinforce Finland. So little known fact that even after WWII started against Germany, that Russia almost ended up on the same side as Germany (by default). Also on a side note Mussolini had offered to ally with France and Britain against Germany, if they allowed them parts of Africa and the Balkans (this offer was refused)
Russia in WWII were to put it simply “useful idiots”. They were as evil as the Nazis and ultimately these two horrible evil regimes ended up in an inevitable conflict. Russia bore the brunt of German ground forces for essentially the entire war from mid 1941. Some people here posted that the Western Allies took a lot of the pressure off Russia in Africa and eventually Italy and of course France. Though from memory the majority of German ground forces (75% - 80%) were always engaged against Russia and that includes during and after D-Day.
Post WWII Russia basically had all of Eastern Europe and half of Germany as their “spoils” because despite that war starting because of the invasion of Poland, ironically Britain and the USA hung them out to dry when the dust settled.
Russia were not the good guys, it was more the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
A brief history lesson on why Russia were never the good guys in WWII. Russia helped invade Poland as part of their pact with Germany. Russia did to countries like Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Finland what the Nazis had done to Austria and Czechoslovakia. Those small countries were effectively bullied into becoming Russian states and then undesirables were eliminated (that’s a polite way of putting it).
Their tactics worked on Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia because they were too weak to do anything about it. Finland resisted and in early 1940 we had the so called winter war. In fact when Russia did this to Finland, Britain and France were ready to intervene but Sweden would not allow their forces safe passage to reinforce Finland. So little known fact that even after WWII started against Germany, that Russia almost ended up on the same side as Germany (by default). Also on a side note Mussolini had offered to ally with France and Britain against Germany, if they allowed them parts of Africa and the Balkans (this offer was refused)
Russia in WWII were to put it simply “useful idiots”. They were as evil as the Nazis and ultimately these two horrible evil regimes ended up in an inevitable conflict. Russia bore the brunt of German ground forces for essentially the entire war from mid 1941. Some people here posted that the Western Allies took a lot of the pressure off Russia in Africa and eventually Italy and of course France. Though from memory the majority of German ground forces (75% - 80%) were always engaged against Russia and that includes during and after D-Day.
Post WWII Russia basically had all of Eastern Europe and half of Germany as their “spoils” because despite that war starting because of the invasion of Poland, ironically Britain and the USA hung them out to dry when the dust settled.
Russia were not the good guys, it was more the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Last edited:
If it wasn't for America Russia would probably have been defeated.
By the end of June 1944 the United States had sent to the Soviets under lend-lease more than 11,000 planes; over 6,000 tanks and tank destroyers; and 300,000 trucks and other military vehicles. 3,000,000 tons of food.
By the end of June 1944 the United States had sent to the Soviets under lend-lease more than 11,000 planes; over 6,000 tanks and tank destroyers; and 300,000 trucks and other military vehicles. 3,000,000 tons of food.
Last edited:
Deleted User 298457
Deleted User 298457
You missed a few classes pal
Edit, apologies sanex1 I see you edited your post to include the word probably. So my post was ultimately unnecessary
This is another common misconception on lend lease. It did of course help immensely but bear in mind that Germany invaded Russia before the USA entered the war in Dec 1941. Russia were only declared eligible for lend lease in Nov 1941 (6 months after Germany invaded). By the time the USA entered the war in Dec 1941, Germany had already burnt itself out trying to take Moscow and once they had failed to do so, a long protracted war with Russia was all but guaranteed (note, Germany had still not fully mobilised until 1942).
The majority of lend lease stuff did not start appearing until mid to late 1942, of course some was delivered earlier but not enough to impact the course of the war in the east during its most critical stage. By the time lend lease material had arrived in significant numbers, Russia had already ground the Germans into a stalemate and were starting to more than hold their own.
I’m no fan of soviet Russia but it seems to be a common theme that the west has always tried to take credit for “saving them” from almost certain defeat against the Nazis .
Last edited:
We were supplying them with equipment from the end of July 41 which included 100s of frontline fighter aircraft.
Like I said, not enough to affect the outcome of the early stages of the German invasion. Lend Lease helped when it got in to full swing but it was not pivotal during mid to late 1941, when the Russians managed to blunt the German army and even by mid 1942 start turning the tide.
I’m not trying to claim Russia would have pushed the Germans back as effectively without the lend-lease act. I’m trying to show that claiming the USA lend lease saved their ass is not necessarily accurate.
I have no love for Russia or the soviets and do not see them as the “good guys” in WWII. But neither am I trying to convince myself the west saved their butts with lend lease. Russia ensured their own survival before lend-lease had got into any meaningful swing but lend-lease certainly sped up the ultimate defeat of Germany in the East. Of that there is no doubt.
Last edited:
- Status