Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

maniak said:
From an american geopolitical perspective isn't it better that this drags on for as long as possible, to drain russian resources? If they see it like that in geopolitical terms it makes sense they arm the ukranians little by little instead of going all in for a quicker victory.

"Ukranians are dying everyday" is an emotional argument for the common joe, but american military/political big heads probably don't give a shit about that.

From what I read this war is hurting europe economically but not so much america.
Click to expand...

I voiced that out exactly at the beginning of the war and I was even insulted on how I dared to suggest that.

Nevertheless, these are the cards dealt and is in the best interest of US that Russia loses, if Ukraine loses or wins is not that relevant as they both might lose at the same time. But US generosity is not because of the freedom of the world but its own interest (as any other country) because it had been shown that they could give all type of weapons faster. If Ukraine had access to all the weapons that they have and had been promised in the first 6 months of war all at once, the situation would be much more different and it seems that the delay was a bunch of excuses, and not only US, Europe as well took even longer to ramp up from helmets to leopards and storm shadows
 
Simbo said:
Whilst some may have certainly thought that at differing points, we're coming from a starting point of almost certain defeat for Ukraine. Every day since has steadily shifted the needle more toward a Russian defeat.

The current short term news cycle is focusing on the atacms decision ...which I'm not sure is even a decision, its just a stance that hasn't changed since day one. While at the same time we've now got ABRAMS being delivered right now, F-16's imminent and probably another whopping aid package announced today while Zelensky is in the US.

Arms supply to Ukraine is still consistently increasing and shows no sign of slowing down, despite what controversy some media try to create on the topic. Oh, and don't forget Ukraine's own home grown long range capability, which is now seemingly taking out key Russian targets at will.

I don't know if Biden/US's choices are the best, worst or something in between, but we're on the right path.
Click to expand...
When I agree that the RU troops are not what many people including themselves thought they were, when I said it was not easy to defeat, I meant that their country is not your typical one. Most would stop the war at this point. Putin is mad and they are in the defensive positions now which will add some advantage to them.

I didn't mean that they were invisible. It is just most people did have expectations that they would collapse quickly.

I agree with most of your post. I am just concerned with the U.S congress support for UKR next year and more. And all these things may not have much to do with the U.S willing to use UKR lives long term for some geopolitics. Biden probably just can't speed it up even if he wanted to.
 
The United said:
When I agree that the RU troops are not what many people including themselves thought they were, when I said it was not easy to defeat, I meant that their country is not your typical one. Most would stop the war at this point. Putin is mad and they are in the defensive positions now which will add some advantage to them.

I didn't mean that they were invisible. It is just most people did have expectations that they would collapse quickly.

I agree with most of your post. I am just concerned with the U.S congress support for UKR next year and more. And all these things may not have much to do with the U.S willing to use UKR lives long term for some geopolitics. Biden probably just can't speed it up even if he wanted to.
Click to expand...

Yes, and there was a lot of wishful thinking that similar pushes to that of Kharkiv/Kherson would continue, before Russian dug in a littered every field with mines.

Trump is most certainly a concern. I'm hoping measures are being taken elsewhere to mitigate that risk.
 
I for one thank @VorZakone for the daily info on the war and the supporting efforts behind it, and hope for more positive news from the battlefront.

IMO the ATACMS issue is a little bit of posturing before the Biden-Zelenski summit, and after that they will be released in a big announcement. Hopefully we'll see what's what soon.
 
The United said:
I am not exactly sure. The likes of Reuters and Politico stated that Ukraine plans to sue them.

Not sure if it's a good thing if true. But I am wondering if those countries are really fecking UKR over to be sued by it. Nonetheless, Poland has been one of its biggest allies in this war.


BBC link below:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66849185
Click to expand...
Well back to what I said..


Poland says it will stop arming Ukraine. How did we get here – and what does it mean for the war?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/21/europe/poland-ukraine-weapons-grain-explainer-intl/index.html


I don't know if the headline is just dramatic or if there is actually any substance to it as the article seemed to suggest.
 
Krakenzero said:
I for one thank @VorZakone for the daily info on the war and the supporting efforts behind it, and hope for more positive news from the battlefront.

IMO the ATACMS issue is a little bit of posturing before the Biden-Zelenski summit, and after that they will be released in a big announcement. Hopefully we'll see what's what soon.
Click to expand...
Cheers.
 
The United said:
Well back to what I said..


Poland says it will stop arming Ukraine. How did we get here – and what does it mean for the war?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/21/europe/poland-ukraine-weapons-grain-explainer-intl/index.html


I don't know if the headline is just dramatic or if there is actually any substance to it as the article seemed to suggest.
Click to expand...

"But the country's president later said the comments had been misinterpreted in the "worst possible way".

Andrzej Duda said it was only new Polish weapons that would not be sent."
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66873495
 
VorZakone said:
"But the country's president later said the comments had been misinterpreted in the "worst possible way".

Andrzej Duda said it was only new Polish weapons that would not be sent."
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66873495
Click to expand...
I hope they eased the tension between them with the grain things. The comments coming from both sides were a bit spicy. Zelensky almost called them out by their names on the U.N speech. Can't blame him doing what he can to help his country though. Just hope he finds the balance and does not burn too many bridges on the process.
 

Budanov: GUR is working on deterrence and retaliation for the Russian Federation to counter the expected winter attacks on infrastructure: "Let them begin. They will also receive an answer"
Click to expand...

Could be a coincidence, could be the start of something bigger. To me it looks like Ukraine won't sit idle this winter if Russia starts their energy terror again. This is maybe the reason Biden vetoed ATACMS in the last second, because he fears Ukraine could use them for retaliation?
 
Sorry for the ignorance but havent Ukraine received some ATACMS already?
Or the range is the question?
 
Relentless strikes against targets in Crimea now. Its starting to look like they are fairly defenceless there against the air.
 
Simbo said:
Relentless strikes against targets in Crimea now. Its starting to look like they are fairly defenceless there against the air.
Click to expand...

Yep, and it remains to be seen whether Russia can replace the lost air defence systems, ships, and naval infrastructure.
It’s been relatively simple (although expensive) for them to replace men, tanks and AFV’s etc, but this feels very different.
This could be Russia’s achilles heel. After all, what good is Crimea to them if it doesn’t have safe, well manned warm-water ports there?
Any idea what they hit in the most recent strikes? I read somewhere that it was Russia’s naval HQ; hopefully a few senior officers were working late that night.
 
Simbo said:
Relentless strikes against targets in Crimea now. Its starting to look like they are fairly defenceless there against the air.
Click to expand...

Yeah, after taking out a couple of S-400 systems as well as radars, it looks like Russian anti-air in Crimea is currently unable to protect the peninsula and Ukraine is exploiting it.
 
Carolina Red said:
I know what I wrote. I wrote it for a reason.

https://missilethreat.csis.org/defsys/s-400-triumf/
https://warontherocks.com/2016/01/how-chinas-new-russian-air-defense-system-could-change-asia/
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blo...l-not-mean-for-ukraines-fight-against-russia/
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/will-ukraine-get-f-16s/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...enses-jets-at-risk-but-can-still-help-ukraine
Click to expand...
Crimea is the most protected Russian space with air defense, mostly with S400 (plus useless systems like pantsir and more). 2 systems were already destroyed by a nation that has a handful of semi modern cruise missiles, next to 0 air force, uses mediocre anti ship missiles like the Neptune to hit ground targets and even very old S200 missiles.

Now I know why Ukraine can do this and it's not because they are using 5th get aircraft or NSM or any real tech from the West in terms of stealth. It is because they use fairly standard decoys (small missiles that have the radar cross section of a plane or large cruise missile) and the S400 radar can not tell the difference, so it gets overwhelmed easily. The S400 is a pile of something not because of the performance of the interceptors, but because the radars and identification of targets is at most 1990s level.

F16 will do very well because Russian radars are extremely vulnerable to decoys and thus easily overwhelmed to the point where they themselves become the main target. Put this in to comparison with the 2 Patriot systems that are protecting Kiev and how impposible it is for the orcs to do major damage here, let alone to accually destroy these systems.
 
jackal&hyde said:
Crimea is the most protected Russian space with air defense, mostly with S400 (plus useless systems like pantsir and more). 2 systems were already destroyed by a nation that has a handful of semi modern cruise missiles, next to 0 air force, uses mediocre anti ship missiles like the Neptune to hit ground targets and even very old S200 missiles.

Now I know why Ukraine can do this and it's not because they are using 5th get aircraft or NSM or any real tech from the West in terms of stealth. It is because they use fairly standard decoys (small missiles that have the radar cross section of a plane or large cruise missile) and the S400 radar can not tell the difference, so it gets overwhelmed easily. The S400 is a pile of something not because of the performance of the interceptors, but because the radars and identification of targets is at most 1990s level.

F16 will do very well because Russian radars are extremely vulnerable to decoys and thus easily overwhelmed to the point where they themselves become the main target. Put this in to comparison with the 2 Patriot systems that are protecting Kiev and how impposible it is for the orcs to do major damage here, let alone to accually destroy these systems.
Click to expand...
We're not going to agree on this.
 
Real Name said:
What are the missiles Ukraine is hitting at Crimea and how are they launched?
Click to expand...

Its a combination of air launched stormshadows and ground launched Neptune's (anti-ship missiles, adapted for ground attack) and S-200's (anti-air, adapted for ground attack), s-200 more used to saturate air-defense. They reportedly are also still using ADM-160, which are the decoy missles that can mimic stormshadows, etc. Also combined with cardboard drones to saturate AD more.
 
Thanks guys. :) How does decoy work, you send cheaper and smaller missiles to overhelm radar so the real thing can go through?
 
Carolina Red said:
We're not going to agree on this.
Click to expand...
Fair enough and you might as well be correct here.

I wanted to make the case for why Ukraine can strike the way it does in the best air protected space of Russia and thus, F16s will also benefit from the same frailties of the Russian AA and in so doing, they will be a major benefit.
 
jackal&hyde said:
Fair enough and you might as well be correct here.

I wanted to make the case for why Ukraine can strike the way it does in the best air protected space of Russia and thus, F16s will also benefit from the same frailties of the Russian AA and in so doing, they will be a major benefit.
Click to expand...
We'll disagree on this. As these strikes prove Ukraine can perform well with their existing jets. F-16 don't add any new capabilities for this kind of long range strike and they are as vulnerable to air defence as the existing jets. They will be a benefit for their better air-to-air capabilities, but this is unrelated to the current crisis of Russian air defense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.