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

Status
Not open for further replies.
robgmun said:
They're absolutely off their rocker if you think that'll make Europe pull out, the response would be turn Moscow into glass!
Click to expand...

Sadly to Russian thinking - a demonstrative attack on the UK in the hope of intimidating the US and Europe by making them pay attention to their own self-interest probably makes a certain kind of sense... in fact I'd go as far as to say I'd pretty much guarantee they'd have already done so at this point of the war if it was not for the UK and France having nuclear weapons.

kylew_is_back said:
They didn't try, it was a trick in order to divert the best ukrainian forces from the south east. and it worked!
Click to expand...

They didn't need to expend a large amount of their airborne and air mobile forces to do that, amongst other factors which clearly demonstrate it wasn't a feint... you are silly to believe that.
 
Last edited:
Dazl1212 said:
The cyber Psychological warfare Russia has been waging against the west for decades, has paid off handsomely for Russia..
Click to expand...

There was a lot of support for Heir Hitler too before the war from society types like the Mitfords and of course Mosley and his fascists a lot of people cheered when Chamberlain waved his piece of paper saying peace in our time, sympathy for the devil is nothing new unfortunately.
 
Harlequin said:
a lot of chatter on russian media about a limited nuclear attack on the UK to force Europe out of supporting the war - apparently the replies to that are along the lines of `Remember Churchill` and that a limited nuclear attack with 10 warheads would garner a full subs worth at the very least in reply.
Click to expand...
I very much doubt it will happen. But if it does then I am toast anyway due to where I live. I hope the UK would have the balls to retaliate in kind. I really hate the idea of retaliation killing innocent civilians. But without the intention to respond then our nuclear deterrent is useless. We must respond with nuclear if Russia strikes first.

Go MAD or go home.
 
Last edited:
NickK said:
Well i suspect that people will have already pointed out - that would be an attack on NATO. China will be very concerned.
A limited nuclear attack is a nuclear attack..
Click to expand...

Same as the majority of the OCUK ukraine thread... utter *********
 
Time to give them better air defence systems and long range missiles to totally destroy the Kerch Bridge and squeeze the supply lines from the East.
 
If belarus joins the war, its a matter of time before Poland gets involved, somehow. Stupidity has a knack of getting its way after all....thanks for the fun Putin, we shall not forget!

Will WW3 start on the Polish border again?
 
Rroff said:
Personally yes - I think people vastly underestimate how paranoid Putin is of the West's intentions. Although it isn't necessarily about holding back - I think people underestimate just how long Russia can continue to drag ancient **** out of storage and put it back into some kind of service and they'll increasingly tighten up measures that have allowed people to dodge mobilisation and increasingly start to conscript proper unless something stops them.

For instance I often see people banding about the ~250K figure for Russian forces used in this war detracted from the pre-war size of the Russian army (~900K) and claiming that Russia has already used ~27% of its army in this war - which isn't remotely accurate. How LNR/DNR forces figure into those numbers isn't entirely clear but Russia made use of a lot of newly drafted soldiers (sure some will be replacing those leaving service - but the most recent draft pre-war was larger than normal... weirdly), around 2-3 weeks before the war they did a round of mobilisation (used for Ukraine) - I'm not sure the exact size but the western military district was about 4K and they are normally tapped less than the east, they've extensively used private military and militia forces like the Chechens, etc. the actual commitment from the Russian armed forces in terms of man power is a lot less than often alluded to. Though they've expended quite a lot of their more experienced soldiers in Ukraine they still have a large amount of regular forces not used in Ukraine - of which about half already have commitments other than Ukraine i.e. arctic and eastern border forces and so on.

Although how much is serviceable and how long it will take to put it back into service is another matter their storage areas for things like tanks, artillery, etc. are sitting at around 50 to 70% of their long term levels - based on what we've seen so far probably 2/3rds of that they'll manage to get into the war in some kind of functional condition. That doesn't include stuff like their T-90 stocks which they've barely touched for Ukraine and are mostly garaged up (albeit as I've mentioned earlier in the thread there is a reason why a lot of their T-90s are sitting in garages rather than deployed with active forces and they are using T-80s and T-72B3s instead).

Despite the talk of them running out of missiles since March - they still managed to fire 70+ at Ukraine last night - no one seems to know their actual stockpile size of cruise missiles, etc. left but apparently they are currently producing around 60 a month (which is a pitiful number for a war - but means they can keep slogging on).

Same with the talk of them running out of small arms and artillery ammo - but the Kharkiv offensive has turned up large stocks of ammo - the bigger problem Russia has is the logistics of getting it where it needs to be - as I said to some derision earlier in the thread Russia is highly dependant on railways to keep their forces moving forward.



Doesn't matter if people in the West want peace or not - Putin has shown no interest in any kind of deal that doesn't involve the complete capitulation of Ukraine and you are deluded if sacrificing Ukraine for world peace would hold. The rest of your post has zero merit until Russia and especially Putin attempt to negotiate in good faith and given all their blatant lies in the UN, etc. it is going to take a lot now for anyone to make any deal with them.

I don't think there is a single instance in history where appeasing a tyrant has ended well and plenty of examples of why it is a very bad idea and any peace it brings is temporary and just building up for a bigger issue in the future.
Click to expand...

The trouble is nobody really knows how large the Russian army is. Look around and you'll find vastly differing numbers. You say ~900k, where did you get that number from?

If anything can be taken from what's happened to date it is that Russian figures cannot be relied upon, you just have to look at the condition of what they regard as a reserve vehicle.
 
Concrete said:
What's all this talk of glass? Some new kind of weapon or is this what all the cool kids call a nuclear attack these days?
Click to expand...
When you heat sand to a high enough temp it turns into glass. Like a nuclear explosion. It's a term I've been hearing since the 90's

Or are you being deliberately dense so strangely make yourself sound cool?
 
Last edited:
BF-Bert said:
The trouble is nobody really knows how large the Russian army is. Look around and you'll find vastly differing numbers. You say ~900k, where did you get that number from?

If anything can be taken from what's happened to date it is that Russian figures cannot be relied upon, you just have to look at the condition of what they regard as a reserve vehicle.
Click to expand...

900K is not my claim - it was the pre-war number for the Russian army on places like Wiki, etc. the thing I'm pointing out is it isn't accurate to take the number of forces used in Ukraine so far on the Russian side away from the pre-war army size like that.
 
Rroff said:
1st Guards and VDV are only a small part of Russia's overall armed forces - though they do make up a large part of the tip of the spear. But contrary to the impression you'd get from a lot of stuff in the news they did not deploy the Guards divisions, etc. at army group or division strength - they've utilised individual regiments, battalions and units (some of which have been almost entirely destroyed with like 20 soldiers left out of 650, etc.) and fleshed out the overall forces in those areas with inexperienced soldiers (and private military and other irregular forces), although as the war has gone on they've sent in more from their established forces piecemeal to replace losses. 4th Guard for instance they've used about 30% of their pre-war level in Ukraine, the remaining about half are deployed to regular duties like the Caucasus region.

People vastly underestimate how much Putin has tried to do this while minimising how much they draw from the regular army, though increasingly they've had to dip into it. Although they have expended a lot from their more experienced pool especially officer corps.
Click to expand...

Russia committed circa 190,000 armed forces personnel to the invasion along with 35,00 DPR and LPR on DDay in February. In august 2021, the defence minister of Russia said the country had around 170 BTG`s >> https://tass.com/defense/1324461 . Given probable expansion, this would have been around 190 for the entire army. Russia has been operating Battalion Tactical Groups since the debarkle in Chechnya - when large scale formations were proven to not work.

120BTG were committed to the invasion of Ukraine, taken from the Western , Central and Southern Military District (Russia has 5 commands , North, South, East, West and Central). This constitutes the bulk of Russian ground forces within 1000 miles of Ukraine. As for armour - why so many T72?`s? Russia had around 500 T80 and 350 T90 in active use, the problem being the thermal sights and a lot of the electronics are french. Once its gone, its gone - T72`s dont have the same level of problems. However that doesnt stop 1st Guards losing a regminets worth of its T80`s when it was overun. (and the odd fresh of the production line T90m, now in AFU use)
 
Its the population of Russian males of any age >16 minus - the 15% who are to fat or well connected enough to fight if push comes to shove.
 
Concrete said:
You know Moscow isn't on/near a beach right?
Click to expand...

you know thats not how this actually works? The term originates from the very first bomb test in Trinity New Mexico when after the detonation a new substance `Trinitite` was discovered, a glassy residue formed by teh heat and rpessure - and from teh rock and clay under the detontaion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom