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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Can Ukraine defend against this?

They claim within the next 10 days Russia will launch its biggest operation yet and Russia has amassed a large number of vehicles for it

"Russian occupiers have prepared 1,800 tanks, 3,950 armoured vehicles, 2,700 artillery systems, 810 multiple-rocket-launch systems, 400 fighter jets, and 300 helicopters for a new offensive operation in Ukraine"
This sounds like a massive unstoppable force, but perspective is important.

On the first day of the Desert Storm ground campaign (the advance from Saudi Arabia into Kuwait, not the one from Kuwait into Iraq), coalition forces were split into five groups for the advance into Kuwait. The largest of these groups rolled in with 1500 tanks, 1400 APCs, 250 helicopters and 150,000 troops (among other units/assets). That is just one of the five groups (the US/British one) and they rolled in after a sustained aerial/artillery/MLRS bombardment involving more aircraft/artillery/MLRS than Russia has in it's total arsenal.

For added perspective Iraq had less anti tank weapons, less precision artillery and less air support in occupied Kuwait than Ukraine has at it's disposal, and the coalition still felt it needed to commit all that and more (there were four other other well armed groups remember).

The news outlets and bloggers who think that the pitiful numbers Russia has amassed for this are going to easily overwhelm Ukraine's defences are the same deluded types who also think Germany ever had greater than zero chance of invading the UK. Not to say this offensive will simply run into the defences like a cheese grater, there will probably be gains, but it will mostly consist of Ukraine tactically falling back while they grate that cheese down.
 
Last edited:
This sounds like a massive unstoppable force, but perspective is important.

On the first day of the Desert Storm ground campaign (the advance from Saudi Arabia into Kuwait, not the one from Kuwait into Iraq), coalition forces were split into five groups for the advance into Kuwait. The largest of these groups rolled in with 1500 tanks, 1400 APCs, 250 helicopters and 150,000 troops (among other units/assets). That is just one of the five groups (the US/British one) and they rolled in after a sustained aerial/artillery/MLRS bombardment involving more aircraft/artillery/MLRS than Russia has in it's total arsenal.

For added perspective Iraq had less anti tank weapons, less precision artillery and less air support in occupied Kuwait than Ukraine has at it's disposal, and the coalition still felt it needed to commit all that and more (there were four other other well armed groups remember).

The news outlets and bloggers who think that the pitiful numbers Russia has amassed for this are going to easily overwhelm Ukraine's defences are the same deluded types who also think Germany ever had greater than zero chance of invading the UK. Not to say this offensive will simply run into the defences like a cheese grater, there will probably be gains, but it will mostly consist of Ukraine tactically falling back while they grate that cheese down.
Plus Russia has proven absolutely inept at running their logistics operation. No point having a massive force with no fuel, ammunition, communication or combined arms coordination.
 
The largest of these groups rolled in with 1500 tanks, 1400 APCs, 250 helicopters and 150,000 troops (among other units/assets). That is just one of the five groups (the US/British one) and they rolled in after a sustained aerial/artillery/MLRS bombardment involving more aircraft/artillery/MLRS than Russia has in it's total arsenal.
Russia already has over 200k troops and thousands of tanks and armoured vehicles deployed in Ukraine though, what's unknown is how much stuff Ukraine has in reserve, given the winter has put stop to them going on any successful breakthroughs like we saw in Summer/Autumn, the question is whether those forces are in reserve or are just defending the gains they made and they have thousands of troops overseas getting training for new stuff which won't come before Russia mount this new offensive

I don't think they'll overwhelm easily but things could get difficult for Ukraine
 
I know Ukraine is not part of NATO at the moment, but what an ally that country would be. I think the only reason NATO have not intervened so far is because basically every country besides the US have been taking the **** regarding defence spending and do not have much to contribute. It's just feels wrong leaving Ukraine on their own to defend against this terror.
 
Can Ukraine defend against this?

They claim within the next 10 days Russia will launch its biggest operation yet and Russia has amassed a large number of vehicles for it

"Russian occupiers have prepared 1,800 tanks, 3,950 armoured vehicles, 2,700 artillery systems, 810 multiple-rocket-launch systems, 400 fighter jets, and 300 helicopters for a new offensive operation in Ukraine"

The UK MOD on the 7th said that "Russian forces have only managed to gain several hundred metres of territory per week. This is almost certainly because Russia now lacks the munitions and manoeuvre units required for successful offensives." which doesn't match with Ukraine's intel on the subject and this difference is very strange as the UK and Ukraine are usually in-step with Intel.

Whilst I'm sure the Russia will try for "a spectacular", as we used to call it, just before the 1 year anniversary of their "special Military fiasco" I'd hope that the UK's MOD inc other Intel agencies would be able to see such a build up in advance, just like they did a year ago, so I'm surprised they're not seeing (or reporting) whatever it is that the Ukrainian's are seeing.


Could Romania just invade Moldova already?

Asking for more conflict & more death all from NATO invasion of a neighbouring democratic (if corrupt) Country which is already flooded with Ukrainian refugees - I do hope you're being sarcastic here StriderX.

I think the only reason NATO have not intervened so far is because basically every country besides the US have been taking the **** regarding defence spending and do not have much to contribute.

I would guess the "real" reason would be that NATO knows they'd win and Russia knows it would lose and that when it does lose it'd let the Nukes fly, hence NATO very deliberately trying to avoid being drawn into direct conflict. However thats just an educated guess and not 100% fact.
 
Last edited:
Russell Brand the once loved lefty now speaking truth.

You want to quote the Sun or the Daily Mail whilst you are at it? All shining examples of bastions of truth...
I mean regardless, so what if US did it? It has done Europe a huge favor! Its old news, move on!

*Edit* I'm sorry but how insufferable is that **** Russell Brand? I thought he had disappeared into obscurity?.
 
Last edited:
Spring is almost here and the hydrocarbon demands will be coming down, without predicted protracted interruption to domestic supply. Come next winter plans will be much advanced to avoid the need for any oil to enter Europe from Russian wells to the East. Ergo no requirement for pipelines.

In a worst case even if Russia were to prevail in there attack on a previously peaceful neighbouring state it will be as a financial basket case unable to make loan repayments not unlike North Korea.
 
He has. He's just watched by red pilled loons on YouTube now.

6 Million loons.

So given the information and multiple quotes from U.S officials, given the history of the latest leak from the reputable Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter.
Who would you honestly bet on blew up the pipeline?

Are you seriously telling me it was Russia after all the motive and evidence points to the U.S?
Is this what your gut tells you? Or are you to stubborn to admit the mainstream news may have misled you all?

The mainstream news who still won't question the act? Don't you at least find this deceiving from your cherished news sources? Who will repeatedly lie to you.
 
Last edited:
6 Million loons.

So given the information and multiple quotes from U.S officials, given the history of the latest leak from the reputable 85 year old journalist,
Who would you honestly bet on blew up the pipeline?

Are you seriously telling me it was Russia after all the motive and evidence points to the U.S?
Is this what your gut tells you? Or are you to stubborn to admit the mainstream news may have misled you all?

The mainstream news who still won't question the act? Don't you at least find this deceiving from your cherished news sources? Who will repeatedly lie to you.
Again.. WHO CARES!!! You seem to be under the impression that this is a big talking point. Its not a big talking point because we dont care!
It could quite easily have been either side. Both have the capability to have conducted it and there is no REAL evidence to suggest which way the needle points as yet.
We dont question it because we are relived we are free of the burden of Russian gas.
 
6 Million loons.

So given the information and multiple quotes from U.S officials, given the history of the latest leak from the reputable 85 year old journalist,
Who would you honestly bet on blew up the pipeline?

Are you seriously telling me it was Russia after all the motive and evidence points to the U.S?
Is this what your gut tells you? Or are you to stubborn to admit the mainstream news may have misled you all?

The mainstream news who still won't question the act? Don't you at least find this deceiving from your cherished news sources? Who will repeatedly lie to you.


I didn't say there is any shortage of loons did I. There are 10s of millions who believe in Qanon, that people drink children's blood to make themselves live longer and pizza names are code words for those children. Loons are free to believe in more than 1 loony theory at a time.

I honestly don't care who blew it up. I'm glad it is blown up though as it takes it out of the equation. If I had to put money on it though I'd put it on Russia, its great propaganda for them and they knew it was dead in the water as Europe has moved on from Russian energy, soon enough it won't be using any Russian energy and long may that continue. Hopefully Russia ends up even further back towards the stone age.
 
How about Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan?
Yeah I guess they would be better examples (I used India as it's an option for a land war), and Taiwan is the one where I'd say a future invasion / military action seems as likely as / more likely than future Russian invasions of ex-USSR states should have looked 10 years ago. Still seems like anything approaching a proper invasion (not just naval harassment and small scale skirmishes etc) against South Korea or Japan is unlikely to me at least.

But in any case I'd say:
A) I don't see why being able to deploy / give (depending on scenario) a few more jets or tanks or whatever to any of those countries in a hypothetical future scenario is more valuable than dealing with a current 100% real threat.
B) the more decisively the West acts with the Ukraine war, the less likely other powers will think they can do what they like without risk.
C) we're a long way from stationing significant numbers of military assets in those places in order to ward off China, and tbh if deterrence fails and China does invade Taiwan I don't see the USA going to war to defend it, and therefore neither will we. Therefore I'm not sure having a handful more jets or whatever in our books will make much difference.
D) we have time to build up our armed forces in the next 5 years if we decide to have a proper production push.

Basically I think being over cautious about this war might might be the worst of both worlds.
 
Again.. WHO CARES!!! You seem to be under the impression that this is a big talking point. Its not a big talking point because we dont care!
It could quite easily have been either side. Both have the capability to have conducted it and there is no REAL evidence to suggest which way the needle points as yet.
We dont question it because we are relived we are free of the burden of Russian gas.

WHO CARES. Only one of the biggest stories for ages. So it's fine if the USA conducted a false flag by blowing up the pipeline and blaming it on Russia, to make EU completely dependant on US energy and escalate the war in Ukraine; which in turn using the war to funnel money back to the military industrial complex with large contracts for weapons and equipment manufacturers...

This would be an act of war if any other country did this
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom