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

Status
Not open for further replies.
StriderX said:
It's impossible to stop an airfield from being used unless you're firing thousands of missiles per week just to stop repairs that takes hours at most, realistically only a sizable nuke can cripple an airfield.
Click to expand...

Depends on the infrastructure available, etc. if you don't have hardened shelters aircraft are easily destroyed on the ground, fuel infrastructure, etc. can be a significant problem. Ukraine doesn't have a clear run of it - a few (accurate) missiles a week will impact the serviceability of their airbases and ability to perform missions even if repaired in hours.

I don't think it is the biggest problem though, they still manage to maintain some air capability now with only sporadic, often inaccurate, strikes against them - though that might change if their air force became more of a threat. The bigger problem IMO is whether Russia can escalate the air war, which is a somewhat debatable one, but on paper if Russia was forced to escalate the air war the change to the overall dynamic of the war may not be in Ukraine's favour, at least as things stand, while they can't take the war into Russian territory.
 
Harlequin said:
See the above
Click to expand...

I mean, suggesting we launch attacks on Russian military targets from NATO air bases is on the same level as setting up a no-fly zone. You're essentially directly involving a NATO aligned country in the conflict. Russia would be fully within it's rights to attack bases in Poland which would trigger article 5, how can people be saying things like that so many months into discussion about this?
 
Roar87 said:
I mean, suggesting we launch attacks on Russian military targets from NATO air bases is on the same level as setting up a no-fly zone. You're essentially directly involving a NATO aligned country in the conflict. Russia would be fully within it's rights to attack bases in Poland which would trigger article 5, how can people be saying things like that so many months into discussion about this?
Click to expand...

Technically it wouldn't trigger article 5 - NATO charter does not compel aid for a member who is attacked in response to them carrying out an act of aggression i.e. using NATO airbases to launch attacks into Russia which drew a retaliation.
 
Roar87 said:
I mean, suggesting we launch attacks on Russian military targets from NATO air bases is on the same level as setting up a no-fly zone. You're essentially directly involving a NATO aligned country in the conflict. Russia would be fully within it's rights to attack bases in Poland which would trigger article 5, how can people be saying things like that so many months into discussion about this?
Click to expand...

Its not the same.

Russia has launched and does launch from Belarus, so that makes them an active participant in your eyes. And yet no ones considers them so, although they do frown on it they wouldn't accept Ukraine attacking there.

A no fly zone of NATO aircraft puts NATO assets in the theatre. Using a NATO base would be different.
Although I am sure Russia would agree with you.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
Its not the same.

Russia has launched and does launch from Belarus, so that makes them an active participant in your eyes. And yet no ones considers them so, although they do frown on it they wouldn't accept Ukraine attacking there.

A no fly zone of NATO aircraft puts NATO assets in the theatre. Using a NATO base would be different.
Although I am sure Russia would agree with you.
Click to expand...

So do you think Ukraine should launch aircraft from Poland? The US could donate B-2's and launch missions from the UK as well.
 
Roar87 said:
So do you think Ukraine should launch aircraft from Poland? The US could donate B-2's and launch missions from the UK as well.
Click to expand...

Do I think they should? No.
Because I think it would play into Putins hands.
It gives him an excuse for escalation and whilst I think that would be very unlikely to be strikes on Poland, keeping his potential excuses for escalation reduced should IMO be kept whenever we reasonably could.

If Putin brought Poland into this war hes done, 100%.
I would fear it could be the escalation needed to "defend" Russia with nukes.

The US could indeed.
In other highly unlikely things that could happen Musk could stop being a moron (at times). Boris could stop lying, as could Trump.
Brain dead MAGAs could see the light.

IF however Ukraine were reduced to needing to fly sorties from another country because their bases were screwed then if Poland wanted to allow that, I would support it.
 
Harlequin said:
www.jpost.com

Israel plans first-ever sale of flagship Merkava tank to European country

Israeli defense products are seeing record demand due to the high cost of supplying Ukraine in its fight against Russia's invasion.
www.jpost.com www.jpost.com

Israel to sell Merkava 2 and 3 to a european country with US backing
Click to expand...

Thats interesting since from what I have read it is recognised as the best desert tank going.
I am not sure which European nation in that regard would see the Merkava as the best solution.
I suppose if it was to swap out some previous generation (eg Leopards) then Spain / France would he high on that list as potential countries.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
Thats interesting since from what I have read it is recognised as the best desert tank going.
I am not sure which European nation in that regard would see the Merkava as the best solution.
I suppose if it was to swap out some previous generation (eg Leopards) then Spain / France would he high on that list as potential countries.
Click to expand...

Cyprus, and they can send their T80`s to Ukraine (thats my guess)
 
StriderX said:
Russia didn't want to be helped.
Click to expand...

The first thing to happen after perestroika was they deposed it's architect and installed a drunk as his successor. He began the slide to a mafia state and subsequently installed an ex KGB chap called Putin to be his successor.

What could a world superpower like Russia need from the US or Europe in terms of assistance.
 
Roar87 said:
Sure if your goal is to weaken Russia, it would also be better to have them as a trading partner rather than an global political adversary. That's what should have happened after the USSR collapsed.
Click to expand...

You really have got some front. Germany/Angela Merkle's whole plan for buying gas from Russia was if they made Russia a trading partner it would stop Putin being aggressive and invading sovereign countries. A policy you criticised Germany for. Now you take the opposite view point.

And you've made the claim in the past that areas of Ukraine are ethnically Russia as a justification for Russia getting to keep those areas in some forced peace treaty. Now you don't seen to be mentioning that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom