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

Status
Not open for further replies.
VincentHanna said:
Taking and utilising Russian tanks must increase the risk of friendly fire incidents, even if I assume they put some Ukrainian flag or markings on them.
Click to expand...

The tanks and IFVs they were already using were old Soviet vehicles anyway. Ditto to their helicopters and fast jets too.
 
I do wonder whar Russia will do after this - even if they get what they want they can hardly be pleased with their armed forces. A navy defeated by a country without a navy, an air force that is ineffective and almost missing from the conflict and an army that has become Ukraines biggest donor of equipment.

Will this disaster actually spur them on to becomimg an effective force with weaponry to match. Will the west stop investing as much, Russia in a conventional sense doesn't look like being a threat for a while.
 
I_M_Weasel said:
I do wonder whar Russia will do after this - even if they get what they want they can hardly be pleased with their armed forces. A navy defeated by a country without a navy, an air force that is ineffective and almost missing from the conflict and an army that has become Ukraines biggest donor of equipment.

Will this disaster actually spur them on to becomimg an effective force with weaponry to match. Will the west stop investing as much, Russia in a conventional sense doesn't look like being a threat for a while.
Click to expand...

Very difficult for them and likely to become increasingly so

People often correlate USSR with Russia in size of economy etc, the simple fact is they are not that large, and they have an economy heavily influenced by petrochemicals. Not great with the direction we are moving globally.
In 2020 Russia had GDP roughly equal to Brazil, and around half that of Germany, around 60% of the UK. Ranking around 10-12 globally (depending on exact date and survey)

Thats not the sort of GDP that can make you a heavy hitter on the global military scales unless your willing to put a hell of a high percentage of that GDP into military and ensure it actually goes there.
IMO at even something like 20% of GDP it would take them 20 years to be remotely the sort of power they would like to be.
 
I_M_Weasel said:
Will this disaster actually spur them on to becomimg an effective force with weaponry to match
Click to expand...

Too much corruption, the rot extends right from the top of the Russian political circle, right down to the unit commanders and soliders on the battlefield. The culture of stealing, bribing and selling their gear and supplies for a quick buck, is so far entrenched, I can't see it changing for decades.

You've just ended up with a bloody useless bunch of hooligans, and I don't see it changing any time soon.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
Problem is your missing a key factor
Under the prevention of nuclear proliferation treaty (I think thats its formal name) all nuclear countries are required to support all non nuclear countries (if signatories) in the event they are attack with nuclear weapons.
If we do not honour that we will see the rest of the world looking to achieve nuclear weapons again.
The only thing that has stopped most wanting their own nukes is that defence requirement.
Click to expand...

So not sure that treaty is a self defence pact like NATO's, I thought it was more about encouraging countries not to pursue nuclear weapons in exchange for access to peaceful use of nuclear (I.e. power).
Twinz said:
When the US nuked Japan, we were functionally the only nuclear power on the planet. That's the reason it worked back then, and also the reason why Russia knows it would go down very differently for them now.
Click to expand...
Not at all, it was the massive human death, estimated up-to 226,000.

If you honestly think any Western power would either directly enter armed conflict with Russia if they used low yield nuclear weapons in Ukraine, you'd be really mistaken. We won't even threaten to do it in a speech let alone actually consider it. We're even careful of what arms we give to Ukraine.... Realistically that position, I.e. no direct intervention even if Russia uses nuclear weapons against Ukraine will already have been decided on.
 
HungryHippos said:
I do think Nuclear talk in this thread has just over-taken more important things, and it's just kinda zzz going around in circles about it as well.
Click to expand...
It’s the headline news today. It’s pretty significant. I know people want to play it down out of fear but if it does happen then things will get out of hand really quickly. We can only hope it doesn’t get that far but it needs Putin to back down or be removed, that is not looking likely at the moment.
 
Last edited:
ultralaser said:
So not sure that treaty is a self defence pact like NATO's, I thought it was more about encouraging countries not to pursue nuclear weapons in exchange for access to peaceful use of nuclear (I.e. power).

Not at all, it was the massive human death, estimated up-to 226,000.

If you honestly think any Western power would either directly enter armed conflict with Russia if they used low yield nuclear weapons in Ukraine, you'd be really mistaken. We won't even threaten to do it in a speech let alone actually consider it. We're even careful of what arms we give to Ukraine.... Realistically that position, I.e. no direct intervention even if Russia uses nuclear weapons against Ukraine will already have been decided on.
Click to expand...
You quote death toll numbers as if there wasn't already a world war (and "massive human death") happening.

No one was even capable of responding to the nukes that were dropped on Japan because no one else had them.

Many, many countries have the ability to respond in-kind to anyone who uses nukes today. <That matters. It changes the equation.
 
Last edited:
ultralaser said:
So not sure that treaty is a self defence pact like NATO's, I thought it was more about encouraging countries not to pursue nuclear weapons in exchange for access to peaceful use of nuclear (I.e. power).

Not at all, it was the massive human death, estimated up-to 226,000.

If you honestly think any Western power would either directly enter armed conflict with Russia if they used low yield nuclear weapons in Ukraine, you'd be really mistaken. We won't even threaten to do it in a speech let alone actually consider it. We're even careful of what arms we give to Ukraine.... Realistically that position, I.e. no direct intervention even if Russia uses nuclear weapons against Ukraine will already have been decided on.
Click to expand...
We don’t know what the US have said to Russia but the suggestions from experts is it would be an armed conflict with NATO of some kind.
 
ultralaser said:
So not sure that treaty is a self defence pact like NATO's, I thought it was more about encouraging countries not to pursue nuclear weapons in exchange for access to peaceful use of nuclear (I.e. power).

Not at all, it was the massive human death, estimated up-to 226,000.

If you honestly think any Western power would either directly enter armed conflict with Russia if they used low yield nuclear weapons in Ukraine, you'd be really mistaken. We won't even threaten to do it in a speech let alone actually consider it. We're even careful of what arms we give to Ukraine.... Realistically that position, I.e. no direct intervention even if Russia uses nuclear weapons against Ukraine will already have been decided on.
Click to expand...
Which would result in nuclear colonialism and proliferation both of which make an eventual global nuclear war nigh inevitable.
 
ultralaser said:
If you honestly think any Western power would either directly enter armed conflict with Russia if they used low yield nuclear weapons in Ukraine, you'd be really mistaken.
Click to expand...

Law of unintended consequences can apply here though,

If Russia did use a tactical weapon, (or more likely, a number of them) that would change the dynamic significantly, I don't think anybody can say either way, what would happen with any certainty.

For example, if they massacred civillians with them or if nuclear fallout went into a NATO country, I don't think anybody can say what would happen.

It would be a very difficult and serious escalation.
 
deuse said:
It's time to give Ukraine some Abrams M1A2 tanks.
Click to expand...
Trouble is a few fold alas..
1. They'll need lots of training to use em properly
2. They'll need lots of ammo to use em for longer than about an hour
3. They'll need spares and people who know how to fix them
4. They'll need a whole load of logistics to stop them becoming pillboxes.
Abrams are notoriously thirsty. It's only really the US with the logistics who are able to operate them and make best use of them.
 
Last edited:
delta0 said:
It’s the headline news today. It’s pretty significant. I know people want to play it down out of fear but if it does happen then things will get out of hand really quickly. We can only hope it doesn’t get that far but it needs Putin to back down or be removed, that is not looking likely at the moment.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to say it's completely irrelevant and off-topic, but it's also just detracting from more ongoing things with what if scenarios that may or may not happen.

It might be that people that want to discuss that might find it better to do so on it's own thread, but I'm not the thread police, I just see the conversation going in circles with the subject.

If it has it's own topic then people can discuss it in more detail without interrupting the main flow of combat that more of us here may be interested in.
 
nsmalley said:
Trouble is a few fold alas..
1. They'll need lots of training to use em properly
2. They'll need lots of ammo to use em for longer than about an hour
3. They'll need spares and people who know how to fix them
4. They'll need a whole load of logistics to stop them becoming pillboxes.
Abrams are notoriously thirsty. It's only really the US with the logistics who are able to operate them and make best use of them.
Click to expand...
None of those issues would stop Ukraine from using them if they thought they could make a material difference on the battlefield over existing tank systems. It's quite remarkable how quickly Ukrainians have adapted to modern western weapon systems and use them alongside existing soviet era tech.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom