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

Status
Not open for further replies.
So the Wagner boss is running for Putins job, that means one of them has to Die, both will know it.

So its a duel to the death, FSB V Wagnerites, both sides will have excellent assassins.

My moneys on Putin winning the duel, he seems less exposed than Prigozhin. But who knows money talks and finding someone close to Putin to do the job wouldn't be that hard when the payout would be in the millions.
 
NinjaCool said:
What an absolute mess! :(
Fq_7Oy6XgAIxgTm
Click to expand...

Its almost genocide of Russian ethnic minorities.
 
bris said:
So the Wagner boss is running for Putins job, that means one of them has to Die, both will know it.

So its a duel to the death, FSB V Wagnerites, both sides will have excellent assassins.

My moneys on Putin winning the duel, he seems less exposed than Prigozhin. But who knows money talks and finding someone close to Putin to do the job wouldn't be that hard when the payout would be in the millions.
Click to expand...

This is most likely just propaganda, Putin owns Wagner and they love him
 
Roar87 said:
He was on the ground in Helmand, yes he was on the frontlines
Click to expand...
He also was refused service in Iraq because it was too "dangerous" for him and his service in Helmand was as a glorified air traffic controller
Chris Wilson said:
2 sitting Labour MP's have done military service, about 42 I think Conservative MP's have done miltary service, so make what you will of that whilst spouting a class warfare agenda :)
Click to expand...
It's not a warfare agenda it's just a simple fact, if you're from a wealthy background you're likely educated and thus if you decide to do military service will be put in a role that suits your education that is generally not frontline grunt work, so wind your neck in
 
Minusorange said:
He also was refused service in Iraq because it was too "dangerous" for him and his service in Helmand was as a glorified air traffic controller
Click to expand...

Forward Air Controller is basically an Infantry man who has the skills to call in air support because they know how to speak to pilots and coordinate, it is literally also carrying a rifle and being on the ground fighting.
 
Minusorange said:
He also was refused service in Iraq because it was too "dangerous" for him and his service in Helmand was as a glorified air traffic controller
Click to expand...

In Helmand he was a maximum of 500 yards from the pointiest pointy end of the action, just like everyone else who served at the same forward operating base. He was not a 'glorified air traffic controller', unless air traffic controllers are now responsible for air strikes and support co-ordination.
 
Last edited:
Minusorange said:
When was he on the frontlines in a war ? No, sitting many miles away looking at a targeting screen in a helicopter doesn't count
Click to expand...

I mean even if you are a helicopter pilot or traffic controller there is still the chance of being blown to tiny bits, with cruise missiles and long range arty, there are only positions that have a slightly higher chance of survivability nowadays.

Infantryman in any country are generally made up of the poorest in society...but less so in the west, I've known quite a few who were not poor who signed up and ended up in the infantry or arty.

Russia deliberately use the poor as they know they can sacrifice them without no one moaning, good luck with that in the west, even if they are 'poor'
 
Last edited:
Roar87 said:
Forward Air Controller is basically an Infantry man who has the skills to call in air support because they know how to speak to pilots and coordinate, it is literally also carrying a rifle and being on the ground fighting.
Click to expand...
yup, usually from memory in with units either directly on the front line or very close to it.

It's also funny people saying flying an apache was safe, it's a fairly large target for any one who can see it, and has all the usual issues with helicopters at low level/high performance flying (you've got very little room before you run out of air if anything goes wrong), added in the fun of IIRC much of Afghanistan being quite a hostile environment for choppers due to the altitude, terrain and dust (I seem to remember reading that they were burning through certain spares quite fast simply due to wear from the dust levels)
 
bris said:
Russia does it to NATO airspace all the time, its just little bit of tit for tat
Click to expand...
Indeed, a few years ago a pair of Tu-160s performed a mock attack run on Hull (which kind of tells you all you need to know about the quality of Russia's battlefield intelligence lol), it raised quite a few eyebrows at the time as the got in firing range and the RAF didn't even pick them up until they turned for home.

However this sort of thing is nowhere near the levels it was during the cold war simply because Russia don't have the USSR's budget and can't operate as many planes.

To put it in perspective, the Soviet air force had in operational service at the time of it's collapse: 700+ Tu-16 Badger bombers, 500+ Yak-28 Brewer bombers, ~300 Tu-22 Blinder bombers, 100+ M-4 Bison bombers, 300+ Tu-95 Bear bombers, ~500 Tu-22M Backfire bombers and ~16 Tu-160 Blackjack bombers.

The Russian Air and Space forces currently have in operational service: 0 Tu-16 Badger bombers, 0 Yak-28 Brewer bombers, 0 Tu-22 Blinder bombers, 0 M-4 Bison bombers, ~42 Tu-95 Bear bombers, ~67 Tu-22M Backfire bombers and ~16 Tu-160 Blackjack bombers. Now granted some of the planes went to Ukraine/Belarus/etc during the USSRs breakup but Russia got by far the lions share (and was even given some of Ukraine's share for signing the Budapest memorandum).

By comparison to the USA, they have also scaled down the amount of bombers they keep in service these days (though they had far less to start with due to the USSR focusing on maintaining a "bomber gap"), but they have 74 B-52s compared to Russia's 42 Bears, they have 45 B-1s compared to Russia's 67 Backfires (I actually expected the USA to have the numerical advantage here lol), and they have 18 B-2s compared to Russia's 16 Tu-160s.
 
Dis86 said:
Oh btw guys, just so you know even when you put irrefutable evidence in front of Minusorange, he's that far up his own backside he can't concede that he's wrong.
Click to expand...
What evidence is there ? 1 prince does some military service in Afghanistan where chances of death are evidently low 150,000 troops are rumoured to have served there, only 547 died, those odds are probably better than odds of being involved in a car accident in the UK, so does that now mean that in reference to my original point, that the poor don't mostly serve on the frontline because a single prince did it in a relatively safe war ? 547 die in a single morning in Ukraine, not exactly an equivalent is it where that amount died in over a decade. In an actual war like in Ukraine with people dying en mass it is always going to be disproportionate for poor people doing the dying because that's the simple reality of war and life, so I'm not sure what is surprising that the poor from Russia are dying en mass ?
 
Last edited:
Minusorange said:
What evidence is there ? 1 prince does some military service in Afghanistan where chances of death are evidently low 150,000 troops are rumoured to have served there, only 547 died, those odds are probably better than odds of being involved in a car accident in the UK, so does that now mean that in reference to my original point, that the poor don't mostly serve on the frontline because a single prince did it in a relatively safe war ? 547 die in a single morning in Ukraine, not exactly an equivalent is it where that amount died in over a decade. In an actual war like in Ukraine with people dying en mass it is always going to be disproportionate for poor people doing the dying because that's the simple reality of war and life, so I'm not sure what is surprising that the poor from Russia are dying en mass ?
Click to expand...
So you're changing the goalposts again? First none of them were at war. Then they weren't on the frontlines. Now it's that not enough people died? What next, they didn't die in a bayonet charge?
 
Minusorange said:
What evidence is there ? 1 prince does some military service in Afghanistan where chances of death are evidently low 150,000 troops are rumoured to have served there, only 547 died, those odds are probably better than odds of being involved in a car accident in the UK, so does that now mean that in reference to my original point, that the poor don't mostly serve on the frontline because a single prince did it in a relatively safe war ? 547 die in a single morning in Ukraine, not exactly an equivalent is it where that amount died in over a decade. In an actual war like in Ukraine with people dying en mass it is always going to be disproportionate for poor people doing the dying because that's the simple reality of war and life, so I'm not sure what is surprising that the poor from Russia are dying en mass ?
Click to expand...
Are you Jon Snow? Because apparently you know nothing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom