Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
I currently live within the blast radius of a nuke that was lost off of the coast of Georgia in the late 50s. It was a midair collision between a bomber & fighter that caused the bomb to be jettisoned...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1958_Tybee_Island_mid-air_collision
Last edited:
It's highly unlikely that a nuclear bomb that wasn't "armed" would go off though, unlike ordinary high explosives. And for some reason it seems slightly different when the plane is otherwise fine compared to when it's involved in an accident, although I appreciate it wouldn't be much consolation to anyone it landed on.
I’m reading a book about Vietnam and French aviation semi-regularly bombed their own positions in their struggle with Vietnamese.
Person in the white car must have shit their pants. Looks like they got lucky and didn't take too big a hit, surprisingly.
Yep, I read the probability of a nuclear detonation being around getting hit by lightning.
This is actually the fourth time I've lived in areas that either would be first strike options for the Soviets or be inside the closest ring for a nuclear plant meltdown.
US droped 4 nukes because an air accident in 1966 in Spain. Some of them mini detonated causing an increase in radioactivity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1966_Palomares_B-52_crash
I hope it was worth it, so Putin can wake up in his palace and thank him for his service. Why are people so fecking stupid and give their only life on this planet for some modern tsar. It makes me sad.
Might be an unpopular opinion, but I think at least that looks like a true funeral - other corpses are just rotting somewhere in Ukrainian swamps. And I think that's even sadder than this.
What’s the thought process behind this from both sides?
The Russians are anticipating an attack on the Crimean front soon, which is not wrong. They are resorting to all kinds of things to raise troop morale.
As for Ukraine, Crimea is the key objective of their endgame. If they reconquer the peninsula, it would create a major disruption for Russian maritime traffic in the Black Sea and nearly (if not outright) the end of Russian territorial ambitions in Ukraine.
Thanks mate - so what could the territorial concessions be in favour of Russia?
Keep Moscow
I hope it was worth it, so Putin can wake up in his palace and thank him for his service. Why are people so fecking stupid and give their only life on this planet for some modern tsar. It makes me sad.
Grim. But in the end, Putin will probably meet a violent end.
I'm not too particular but would really prefer it be by defenestration.
I remember it, headline news in the UK at the time. Both the US and USSR were afraid of a 'first strike' nuclear attack, and the US had nuclear-armed aircraft in the air at all times so that they could retaliate even if there was a sneak attack on their bases. Daresay the Russians had too.
I know, but with great age comes great wisdom, interspersed with not knowing what the feck's going on anymore of course.You "remembered"? christ
An attack on Crimea is enormously difficult, the only land route onto the peninsula, the Perekop Isthmus, is 9km wide, with no cover and heavily fortified. It's not realistic to think that Ukraine has the capability to go through there.
True, but because it is peninsula, it also means you can quite easily block off the Russian's from resupply (if you can destroy the Kerch Bridge) and then slowly choke the Russians out without having to assault it, like they did in Kherson city.
Or maybe they are straight up going to storm the beaches like D-Day
Doubt it though.It's all in the strategy, and who knows what it will be. God knows what weapons the Ukrainians have these days, but I hope its a lot.
It wouldn't surprise me if Ukraine deliberately leaks the "attack on Crimea" rumor, so Russia will keep a considerable force on the peninsula and maybe even better, rotate a bunch of its forces there. That would make their attack on the front much easier.
Personally I don't see a D-Day on the beaches of Crimea. Russia still controls the water and Ukraine has only small boats, which will be easy to spot and sink.
Know what you mean. Without the great wisdom part though.Couldn't resist sharing this...
I don't think I've seen even one realistic prognosis that included Ukrainians retaking Crimea in the plan for this counter-attack. Most expect it to be given back as a collateral at the end of this war. Ukraine doesn't have any military fleet of note and neither are their aerial forces strong enough to be able to play a key role in retaking Crimea — and retaking Crimea without the overwhelming support from air & sea is going to cost tens of thousands of lives.True, but because it is peninsula, it also means you can quite easily block off the Russian's from resupply (if you can destroy the Kerch Bridge) and then slowly choke the Russians out without having to assault it, like they did in Kherson city.
Or maybe they are straight up going to storm the beaches like D-Day
It's all in the strategy, and who knows what it will be. God knows what weapons the Ukrainians have these days, but I hope its a lot.
Retaking all the land up to Crimea is probably something they'll attempt to do though.
I think everyone's assuming they're going to charge into Crimea shooting everything. I don't think that's the case. There will be a slow degradation of existing Russian forces there before any movement of troops. But it could take a while for that to happen.
Assuming they can reach the near entrance to Crimea (and that's a big ask in itself), then HIMARs (or drones) will be able to hit all troop and ammo bases in Crimea with ease. They'll just shell everything from a distance including the bridge, ship docks, train stations etc.
If the defensive situation in Crimea gets more and more difficult for the Kremlin, they are more likely to give it up in negotiations.
Last edited:
IF Ukraine are able to liberate Kherson oblast and Zaporizhzhia oblast it would make the counter offensive a massive succes, talking about Crimea is just unrealistic at this point.
Even the first 2 will be a monumental task when you consider that Russia has been building defensive fortifications and minefields for the past 6 months and Ukraine only have a very small air force and a pretty limited amount of mechanized troops available.
Even the first 2 will be a monumental task when you consider that Russia has been building defensive fortifications and minefields for the past 6 months and Ukraine only have a very small air force and a pretty limited amount of mechanized troops available.
Exactly. Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions would be more than enough to put Putin under immense pressure in Russia to end this senseless war. Even the most propaganda irradiated people will start to ask themselves why they are fighting, if they even can't keep a few regions in Ukraine. Even with the western support, Ukraine won't be able to retake all of their regions including Crimea and Donbass most likely. They need to create a scenario, where Russia "voluntarily" leaves those reagions like they did in Afghanistan.
Agreed. UA forces need to push out the RA troops from those towns first before even thinking about taking Crimea. I mean, seriously, some people are overhyping the UA forces. I don't say they are bad, but they are still a long way from being well trained and equipped to take their eastern lands, let alone Crimea.
That happened more then half a century ago mate. Technology is supposedly to have improved significantly since then
This. I'd say ukraine should capture the 4 Oblast and then go to the negotiating table.
The realistic path through Crimea hasn't really changed since the liberation of Kherson, which IMO is: A) liberate Nova Khakovka (right to the left side of the Dnieper river), B) block the water supply to Crimea, C) slowly but surely weaken the russian forces and infrastructure there with long range artillery, D) apply pressure in other fronts to the point that Russia keeping battle and/or occupation forces in Crimea isn't sustainable anymore, E) Profit: either Putin makes the political decision of staying in Crimea and eventually losing the war, or voluntarily leaves (with the subsequent political backlash) in order to keep a chance of winning in the Donbas.
Easier said than done though.
Easier said than done though.
Last edited:
The UA has had three or four towns under massive pressure from the RA right now for months, which is exhausting their reserves, something that people really have not thought about, I think. They have to relive them first before applying any meaningful pressure anywhere.
Those towns would have been starting points for the UA counterattack. I don't see many other places where the UA could go and gain any meaningful territory without relieving the pressure in those towns or getting encircled themselves in new places.
Those towns would have been starting points for the UA counterattack. I don't see many other places where the UA could go and gain any meaningful territory without relieving the pressure in those towns or getting encircled themselves in new places.
Which 4 are you referring to ?