Given the state of Russian military I don't think they want the US involved, it would be over in a matter of hours, the only thing they have to counter a proper army is nuclear deterrent.
Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
Given the state of Russian military I don't think they want the US involved, it would be over in a matter of hours, the only thing they have to counter a proper army is nuclear deterrent.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 12,169
- Location
- London, UK
I'm fairly sure they know that in Ukrainian command and would only use it to target Crimea and any bases just inside Ukrainian territory.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 3,830
To be fair, a nuclear deterrant is all you need.
Last edited:
Indeed, if they didn't have one they would have been put back to the stone age already.
Wonder what all those who thought we should get rid of ours are thinking now, I very much doubt they have changed their minds, likely say no one should have them, yes in an ideal world but that ship sailed long ago.
They're probably still thinking the nonsense they were already thinking.
Something about "But Corbyn" and "But Trident" no doubt.
Were you on Granby? I was in Munster (we moved a few years earlier), before coming back to Senne and rejoining the lads.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 9,322
- Location
- newcastle
No mate, before my time that one
Just to clarify - AWACS is used primarily for control and early warning of "airborne" targets i.e. enemy planes, with only a very tiny/niche ability to ID very specific "radar emitting" ground objects (SAM/AAA/EW Radar etc), rather than general ground forces like tanks, infantry etc.
Instead it'll be a combination of the E-8 JSTARS (which tracks vehicles) and RC-135W Rivet Joint aircraft (which listens to comms alongside other more interesting things etc) and some Global Hawk drones which are doing the vast majority of whatever ground forces targetting NATO/US/UK are providing to Ukraine. Then there's just good old HUMINT/spies/surveillance/internet etc (SM usage etc) in use too.
Last edited:
lol, makes me old then. Did 7 years and left in 93.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 9,322
- Location
- newcastle
I did 16 years, joined in 96
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 3,830
There's no "if"- they do have a significant nuclear capacity and all the wishful thinking in the world won't change that.
Russia's nuclear shield has now demonstrated to the world, and especially China, the benefits of having that capacity. The next few years should be fun.
Thise people are thinking exactly the same way, as it's hard to change your way of thinking.
Lots of experimental and multi-role systems being used as well with the current situation including the old Guardrails, ARTEMIS platform (Bombardier Challenger 650) and a related super-secret iteration of it that no one seems to know much about* (using a heavily modified Bombardier Challenger), various old and new maritime platforms which are being used for both land and sea use. And various custom ISTAR packages being run out of Beechcraft King Air 350s, etc.
* Apparently can track with high precision/resolution a single vehicle at ~300km or something.
EDIT: Some of the planes are pretty impressive - capable of running air traffic control for an entire region if they had to as well as acting as a battlefield command and comms relay and long range ground, sea and air monitoring including able to detect launches of ballistic threats, etc.
Last edited:
This is quite the can of worms, as the whole reason that Ukraine doesn't have the capability to land precision strikes deep into Russia anymore is because the USA convinced them to scrap the weapons/systems that could do it plus dismantle their ability to produce more (doing so scored the USA bid buddy points with Putin at the time) under promise that if anything like this ever happened the USA would totally have their back (obviously the USA never expected anything like this to actually happen).
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2021
- Posts
- 1,393
- Location
- Sowerby Bridge
This would be one step to far and could spark more conflict.
Russian Defence Ministry:
- According to Latest Information 89 Russian Servicemen Died in Makiivka
- Officials Responsible "For the Tragedy in Makiivka" Will Be Brought to Responsibility
- Commission is Investigating "Circumstances" Around Makiivka Attack
- Main Reason for Makiivka Attack Was Unauthorised Use of Mobile Phones by Russian Servicemen Which Allowed Ukrainian Forces to Determine Location
https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...makiivka-blames-use-mobile-phones-2023-01-03/
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,586
- Location
- Rutland
They're going to go after Putin?
Last edited:
CBS quoting US intelligence official: we believe the death toll to be between 200 and 500, large number of secondary explosions occurred due to ammo storage in the same building
Wagner gets asked why they can't take Bakhmut. Their long list of excuses:
* We lack artillery ammunition
* We lack armored vehicles to move with
* Bakhmut is a fortress, every house is a fortress
* There is a Ukrainian defence line every 10 meters
* It takes days and weeks to capture one house or breakthrough one defence line
So there you have it, sending soldiers without artillery support and without armour support into rows and rows of defensive lines - sounds like a sure way to a quick grave
www.reddit.com
* We lack artillery ammunition
* We lack armored vehicles to move with
* Bakhmut is a fortress, every house is a fortress
* There is a Ukrainian defence line every 10 meters
* It takes days and weeks to capture one house or breakthrough one defence line
So there you have it, sending soldiers without artillery support and without armour support into rows and rows of defensive lines - sounds like a sure way to a quick grave
Reddit - Dive into anything
www.reddit.com
Last edited:
- Status