|
30 min montage of urban combat during the Kupiansk Offensive with the Ukrainian Kraken Unit. Intense stuff.
|
Originally Posted by Baldeep Inminj
(Post 11326482)
When it comes to the Kherson 'withdrawal', I have serious misgivings and see it as a potential Trojan Horse in that it is not at all what it appears to be.
My reasoning, such as it is, is that the Russians want to destroy the UKR military and they have thus far failed to do so. They have then attacked civilians in a fit of rage founded in their own incompetence and weakness - Russia really is a piece of sh!t country with a 3rd world military capability and staggeringly incompetent leaders. Whatever they hoped to achieve by attacking civilian targets has clearly failed - the hatred of Russia and the desire to defeat them is stronger than ever amongst both UKR and it's myriad allies - Putin has quite literally destroyed Russia as it must now be crushed in insignificance for the world to be able to move on.. Russia knows that if it does not defeat the UKR military then is doomed to lose this war (Russia losing is inevitable as the West simply cannot afford any other outcome). So...how does Russia target the UKR military it has so comprehensively failed to beat so far? How about this...'withdraw' from Kherson, knowing that the people moving in will be troops, not civilians. When the city is full of UKR soldiers, then strike. The strike could be massive conventional, but I think not. Given the call for civilians to leave (people Russia considers 'theirs'), I think a massive Chemical attack might be on the cards and fots Russia's playbook - an attempt to really degrade the UKR military whilst appearing to minimize civilian casualties. This is a very over-simplified idea, but Putin is a psychoticially insane narcissist and he thinks like a 6 year old playing with toy soldiers. We are still just dancing around handbags and waiting for the real party to start - it is absolutely inevitable* that NATO will end up in a full-scale war with Russia. NATO knows this, and is using UKR to degrade Russia as much as possible before that happens. * If Putin is assassinated, then maybe there is hope for something other than WWIII I wish there was a single NATO leader with a pair of balls. I could only see a NATO conflict with russia if Ukr. suffered very significant losses - i.e. were about to capitulate. I don't think we'll see a widespread European war and it'll be fought in Ukraine and the Baltics if there is NATO-russia confrontation. Putin will need to raise an army far larger than it has now to make it to the Western side of Ukraine. |
Putin will need to raise an army far larger than it has now to make it to the Western side of Ukraine. |
Originally Posted by Winemaker
(Post 11326567)
I think we all know it's not the size of the army, but rather being able to equip it with modern weapons and trained troops that is (are) the critical factor(s). Russia has shown itself to be a paper tiger; the oligarchs were allowed free rein to strip wealth from the country and live in villas in Gstaad and have lots of large boats. There is no true understanding in Russia as to where they actually stand in regards to anything, as everyone is lying and the books are cooked. Putin is grasping at straws and the crows are coming home to roost. Seriously, with less than 2% of the global GNP Russia is going to fight all of us? Keep the pressure on, keep supplying arms to the Ukrainians who want their country back, and the rest will fall into place.
|
Mikhail Vasilyev has been smote by the real god of war
Mikhail Vasilyev Russian orthodox priest, has died in Ukraine. He is famous for telling women who didn't want to send their sons to war that they should have had more sons. " Social media chatter said he was visiting soldiers to boost morale, when a HIMARS strike hit within 3 meters, killing him. Plus its been reported that war gonzo has required a partial leg amputation after standing on a butterfly mine |
Originally Posted by unmanned_droid
(Post 11326556)
I don't think we'll see a widespread European war and it'll be fought in Ukraine and the Baltics if there is NATO-russia confrontation. Putin will need to raise an army far larger than it has now to make it to the Western side of Ukraine.
Any use of Nukes/Chems by them would be 'defensive' in the sense of slowing down defeat/negotiating better T&C's as long as they still have something to negotiate. In there lies the real danger of an 'accident'. |
RUSI - Ukraine is at risk of running out of air defence weapons and western countries should send advanced fighter jets including F-16s….
“The idea that sending Himars and 155 howitzers is less escalatory than supplying Ukraine with fighter aircraft which it couldn’t possibly sustainably operate inside Russian airspace is not credible”.…. The Russian Air War and Ukrainian Requirements for Air Defence New RUSI Special Report based on fieldwork explains: - How Russia's air force failed thus far - Why it still poses a serious danger - Why Western aid must now prioritise Ukrainian air defence https://rusi.org/explore-our-researc...ts-air-defence The Russian Air War and Ukrainian Requirements for Air Defence |
I’d be interested to hear how they think the AFU are managing to do that in occupied territory…
Russians are going to blow up the Kakhovka HPP dam. According to the General Staff, the occupiers ordered the residents of Beryslav to leave the city by November 10. The invaders call the main reason for the evacuation "the undermining of the Kakhov dam by the AFU." https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....0122f39f3.jpeg |
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 11326701)
I’d be interested to hear how they think the AFU are managing to do that in occupied territory…
Russians are going to blow up the Kakhovka HPP dam. According to the General Staff, the occupiers ordered the residents of Beryslav to leave the city by November 10. The invaders call the main reason for the evacuation "the undermining of the Kakhov dam by the AFU." https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....0122f39f3.jpeg ORAC, that's just how good the Ukrainians are, they can do these things... Does count as incomprehensible though yet seems to be in keeping with Russian logic which goes something like:: "da; our crack troops and equipment got clobbered, so our plan of attack is to bring in raw geriatrics and the infirm, give them 1892's, withhold body armour, food and water, and then force them to the front, where we will go red on red to achieve the [quote] 60%[unquote] own goals. Our piece d' resistance shall be to win hearts and minds that have been lost through murder and atrocities, by firing missiles at the general population, is good, this plan, nyet?" On the subject of whether drones are going to change the way forces are structured in the future, it has the potential to be a factor in most areas, the following video is the consequence of having good forward observation and accurate arty gun laying systems. It changes the risks of putting any potential target in range of someone with wheels, a smart phone and a quad copter, when they are supported by indirect fire. When the major targets are being routinely hit by accurate fire, and the other team is able to quite frequently hit planet earth, and for small targets down to the guys helmet in the foxhole, individual packages are dropped, seems that the whole concept of who wants to play in these sandpits is going to be up for review. The Schlieffen Plan and similar war plans would be getting covered in red crosscuts over most of its recipe at this time one would guess. The attack helicopter has taken a beating, the KA-52 is up there in capability, and they have lost 1/3rd of the total available fleet so far or a touch over. The SU-25 seems to have it's moments, they lose some, but they may have better survivability than the helos in this particular conflict. Maybe the A-10 remains relevant... |
Originally Posted by uxb99
(Post 11326448)
The only problem I have with this is how are they intercepting a mobile phone transmission?
I worked in telecoms and mobile phone signals are encrypted. Very difficult to intercept and decrypt. Not impossible but very difficult.
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 11326698)
RUSI - Ukraine is at risk of running out of air defence weapons and western countries should send advanced fighter jets including F-16s….
“The idea that sending Himars and 155 howitzers is less escalatory than supplying Ukraine with fighter aircraft which it couldn’t possibly sustainably operate inside Russian airspace is not credible”.…. |
Originally Posted by Wokkafans
(Post 11326543)
30 min montage of urban combat during the Kupiansk Offensive with the Ukrainian Kraken Unit. Intense stuff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVvg...#1054;"KRAKEN" Also, note to self: if you get cornered, don't hide in the privy (how many rounds did that guy take?) |
"He wants to break the Ukrainians not at the front line, where that’s not proving possible, but by breaking the West's will to support them.
The weak link in this war, potentially, is us." |
Where would these fighters be based ? If in Ukraine, who would maintain them and where are the trained pilots (A10 excepted ) ? If not in Ukraine, which countries would host them, given the risk of Russian attack and the possible (but not certain ) risk of invoking NATO clause 5. Presumably, because of this, it would require unanimous NATO agreement at governmental level to initiate such a programme. Congress has already provided several hundred million dollars to train UKR pilots and ground crew - numerous sources indicate that many are already in training at various bases. Plenty of bases in western Ukraine where they are still successfully flying missions using their SU-24/25s etc. Also plenty of trained European ground crew who, I am sure, would be more than willing to sign up and help service and turn them - routine NATO training to perform turnarounds of other NATO types. Maintenance and repair could be done in Poland or elsewhere. |
Hitting the Russian line at night, does not appear to be any return fire?
|
It seems the Russians keep shooting themselves in the foot, they watch the Railway Admin Building burn down because previously they destroyed the water infrastucture so cannot put it out.
|
Originally Posted by Winemaker
(Post 11326567)
I think we all know it's not the size of the army, but rather being able to equip it with modern weapons and trained troops that is (are) the critical factor(s). Russia has shown itself to be a paper tiger; the oligarchs were allowed free rein to strip wealth from the country and live in villas in Gstaad and have lots of large boats. There is no true understanding in Russia as to where they actually stand in regards to anything, as everyone is lying and the books are cooked. Putin is grasping at straws and the crows are coming home to roost. Seriously, with less than 2% of the global GNP Russia is going to fight all of us? Keep the pressure on, keep supplying arms to the Ukrainians who want their country back, and the rest will fall into place.
The West, and increasingly, Ukraine, have high quality equipment - in small numbers (relative terms). As an example, I recently learnt of the ubiquity of 20mm AA cannons in Germany during the Cold War, that seem to have all disappeared. I have to wonder if there will be a pause on the ground, over the winter period where both sides will shift from a battle on the ground to a battle in the factories - after all, economics is a front in any war. Who can outproduce who, and with what. £1xk drones with C4 can take out £xxxk electricity substations made from custom long lead time components too easily not to consider the effect that has on the war on the ground. Shooting down those £1xk drones is now a key task, and they're using systems that cost £xxm to do it - with rounds that are in the £xm price bracket. I feel, after the GFC, austerity, and covid this may be a closer run thing for the west than many might imagine if the russians can drag out the attacks and attrite enough infrastructure and equipment. |
More AA medium-range (25 -40 km ) systems received as per Ukrainian Defence Ministry.
https://www.focus.de/politik/ausland..._52139887.html Nasams and Aspide - no numbers mentioned. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASAMS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspide |
Originally Posted by fdr
(Post 11326714)
On the subject of whether drones are going to change the way forces are structured in the future, it has the potential to be a factor in most areas,
The US Navy was ahead of them. Over a decade ago they started deploying a new kind of helicopter detachment on their surface combatants: a mix of MH-60R Seahawk and MQ-8 UAV (basically an old Bell Of course the Global Hawk has been working for about 15 years, and the American services have been experimenting with drone swarms and drone swarm counters for about a decade, not to mention the Predator/Reaper units in the USAF. And the Marines finally, after a quarter of a century of arguing about it, got rid of the tank. Not sure when the CVBG organic UAV tanker will go live, but I think it's sooner, not later. Last tidbit I had was a stand up of VUQ-10 in October 2021 with four aircraft at Point Mugu, and they appear to have done so. The change is already happening. |
|
You couldn't make this up: a photo of an Ukrainian Su-27 was put as the background on the memorial plaque of a deceased Russian pilot.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 23:02. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.