|
Post by mtrstudent on Apr 11, 2024 15:17:40 GMT
How much of this is actually true? Obviously the wall came down in 89 not 92 but was the reunification of Germany really dependent on Gorbachev being given assurances that NATO wouldn't expand any further East? Had Putin and Zelensky actually reached a deal before Johnson went out there? Some interesting theories from Kennedy but are they just that, theories? Did NATO Promise Not to Enlarge? Gorbachev Says “No”. IMO it's simple: Western politicians know it might hurt them with voters to say openly "I support the dictator conquering and genociding the democracy". So they have to use excuses, and Russia has prepared those excuses. Some things to think about; Do we have to do everything that was discussed in negotiations but never made it into a final agreement? Why does russia get to say where NATO ends? NATO isn't a threat to russia, only their ability to conquer and genocide their neighbours. Russia signed an agreement saying it would never invade. NATO *never* signed an agreement about the expansion it did.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Apr 11, 2024 15:41:59 GMT
Russia's only factory for new BMPs could flood. The forecast is a 9-14 metre high flood, 12 metres would put the factory in the flood zone. Go flood go!
Crazy random things can affect the war.
|
|
|
Post by scfcno1fan on Apr 11, 2024 15:55:11 GMT
Where are we at now? Everything just seems to be grinding along. I just don’t understand how and when this ends. Still seems surreal it’s actually happening. All the videos on X, it’s bizarre. Like a computer game. Which is scary. Ukrainian soldiers with NATO tech are better than Russians, and the West's plan was to grow supplies until the Ukrainian army could kill russians quickly enough to open gaps and free their land. Then the US Republicans threw in with Putin, North Korea and Iran, and blockaded new US aid to Ukraine. So this year Ukraine doesn't have enough ammo, which leaves Putin free to blast dams, power stations and the defenders. Putin has a huge soviet reserve of tanks and vehicles to empty, he's taking most of the good kit out and is throwing it into ukrakne this year. If he can kill or force enough Ukrainians to flee before European ammunition supplies reach the needed level, then he might be able to win. Basically the republicans have given him a window to try and win, but if ukraine doesn't crack and Biden and the Democrats win the 2024 election, then Putin is fucked because the West will supply Ukraine and Russia will have used up almost all of its decades of Soviet production. Sorry for the long post... It's basically what I've been saying for years. Putin only has hope because of western weakness and pro-dictatorship groups in the West, his most important allies on Earth being MAGA Republicans. No worries mate! Thanks for the all the updates. Greatly appreciated!
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Apr 11, 2024 18:37:58 GMT
Russia is now using basic trucks with a cage on for frontline attacks too.
They're throwing in everything!
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Apr 11, 2024 19:39:48 GMT
How much of this is actually true? Obviously the wall came down in 89 not 92 but was the reunification of Germany really dependent on Gorbachev being given assurances that NATO wouldn't expand any further East? Had Putin and Zelensky actually reached a deal before Johnson went out there? Some interesting theories from Kennedy but are they just that, theories? I've seen similar sorts of things said before, but they all raise the same questions for me. If we say 'NATO shouldn't expand because it's not fair to Russia somehow', are we not effectively saying that countries shouldn't be allowed to join a defensive pact because Russia should be able to reserve the right to invade adjacent countries if it wants to? Which is exactly what Russia have been doing for nearly 15 years in Georgia and Ukraine, and tried to do in Moldova. Are we saying that countries adjacent to Russia shouldn't be allowed actual autonomy because that wouldn't be fair to Russia? And Russia are entitled to invade any adjacent country that, say, democratically chooses to pivot away from them? There's this constant assertion that the only fair and reasonable thing for Russia is to invade nearby countries if they don't do what they want. Could you imagine any world where it would be considered acceptable for us to invade the Republic of Ireland if they elected a government sympathetic to Russia?
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Apr 12, 2024 19:58:23 GMT
Unrelated to this thread but would like to get mtrstudent or Bayerns perspective on the below.
Is this correct?
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Apr 13, 2024 6:57:05 GMT
The US won't take on Iran in a conventional war.
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Apr 13, 2024 9:27:56 GMT
Unrelated to this thread but would like to get mtrstudent or Bayerns perspective on the below. Is this correct? I think that he’s bigging up Iran to be honest. However, I really don’t see it coming to that. Iran will make a play that is similar to the magnitude of the attack by Israel. The US will add a sanction.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Apr 13, 2024 14:22:15 GMT
A map of russian vehicle losses just in one area. The videos show lots of their soldiers packed onto most of those vehicles and huge casualties.
There's a big question about just how many of the storage vehicles they can reactivate - it's somewhere between 6 months and 3 years worth of vehicles left.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Apr 13, 2024 14:31:29 GMT
Unrelated to this thread but would like to get mtrstudent or Bayerns perspective on the below. Is this correct? I know very little about Iran mate, but the linked tweet sounds like all those "experts" who wrote stories in 2022 about how Ukraine would fall in 3 days, or Belarus would invade Ukraine any day now. The people who were right about russia-Ukraine wrote in totally different ways, this guy's like one of the "experts" that appeared out of nowhere and just spouted their feelings. It's sprinkled with russian and Iranian propaganda - I can give some examples if you care for details! Coincidentally I think it would be insanely hard to invade Iran, that Iran could fuck world oil supplies and that the US won't do it. But if I'm wrong, we'd see it coming because Congress would have to vote and the buildup would take months and be obvious.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Apr 13, 2024 14:39:09 GMT
Thank you Germany! This will save lives, but the problem is most of the missiles are made in the US, and the Republicans are on the side of Russia-Iean-North Korea and blockading US aid...
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Apr 13, 2024 14:55:51 GMT
Haunting picture from a defender.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 13, 2024 19:09:01 GMT
The US won't take on Iran in a conventional war. What will they do?
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 13, 2024 23:08:28 GMT
Unrelated to this thread but would like to get mtrstudent or Bayerns perspective on the below. Is this correct? Just seen this. He seems an absolute fantasist.
|
|
|
Post by Marc01 on Apr 14, 2024 20:20:20 GMT
/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1621366940550991872¤tTweetUser=igorsushko
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Apr 14, 2024 23:11:45 GMT
Unrelated to this thread but would like to get mtrstudent or Bayerns perspective on the below. Is this correct? Just seen this. He seems an absolute fantasist. Iran is dangerous but the headlines today say many of their ballistic missiles failed last night. Russia's professional army lost to Ukraine in under a year, the tweet talks as if Iran is somehow way better than russia. Russia has about 60 million more people, 5x the GDP, 3x the oil production, and the soviet heritage of great missile tech and stored vehicles etc etc. I'm pretty sure Iran could fuck world oil supplies and be extremely difficult to defeat though. The US could defeat someone like Saddam, but not the Taliban.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 15, 2024 10:15:13 GMT
Just seen this. He seems an absolute fantasist. Iran is dangerous but the headlines today say many of their ballistic missiles failed last night. Russia's professional army lost to Ukraine in under a year, the tweet talks as if Iran is somehow way better than russia. Russia has about 60 million more people, 5x the GDP, 3x the oil production, and the soviet heritage of great missile tech and stored vehicles etc etc. I'm pretty sure Iran could fuck world oil supplies and be extremely difficult to defeat though. The US could defeat someone like Saddam, but not the Taliban. It is and I think part of the fantasy is that America is trying to manoeuvre to put boots on the ground. I can only think that is the absolute last thing they’d want. It’d be an absolute nightmare of a fight. I think that way they will want it to go is more of a populist uprising and letting the Iranians do the dirty work.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 15, 2024 10:19:04 GMT
Iran is dangerous but the headlines today say many of their ballistic missiles failed last night. Russia's professional army lost to Ukraine in under a year, the tweet talks as if Iran is somehow way better than russia. Russia has about 60 million more people, 5x the GDP, 3x the oil production, and the soviet heritage of great missile tech and stored vehicles etc etc. I'm pretty sure Iran could fuck world oil supplies and be extremely difficult to defeat though. The US could defeat someone like Saddam, but not the Taliban. It is and I think part of the fantasy is that America is trying to manoeuvre to put boots on the ground. I can only think that is the absolute last thing they’d want. It’d be an absolute nightmare of a fight. I think that way they will want it to go is more of a populist uprising and letting the Iranians do the dirty work. They would look to bomb them not boots on the ground , providing the oli supply is unaffected that is
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Apr 15, 2024 10:38:05 GMT
It is and I think part of the fantasy is that America is trying to manoeuvre to put boots on the ground. I can only think that is the absolute last thing they’d want. It’d be an absolute nightmare of a fight. I think that way they will want it to go is more of a populist uprising and letting the Iranians do the dirty work. They would look to bomb them not boots on the ground , providing the oli supply is unaffected that is But you can't ultimately win wars, just by bombing countries, unless they're nuclear bombs of course. And it is going to be virtually impossible for the US to get boots on the ground in Iran. At the end of the day, neither Iran or the US want a war and it's about time that Netanyahu was put in his place for attempting to start one.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 15, 2024 10:58:11 GMT
It is and I think part of the fantasy is that America is trying to manoeuvre to put boots on the ground. I can only think that is the absolute last thing they’d want. It’d be an absolute nightmare of a fight. I think that way they will want it to go is more of a populist uprising and letting the Iranians do the dirty work. They would look to bomb them not boots on the ground , providing the oli supply is unaffected that is Absolutely. The Iranian sea capability is an interesting one and they have the real potential to overwhelm even a carrier group. So it’d be interesting to know how the Yanks would plan to stop that. Apache’s would be very useful for it. But again it’s based on swarming them and hoping one boat/missile gets through to a carrier by giving them too many targets to focus on.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 15, 2024 11:01:11 GMT
They would look to bomb them not boots on the ground , providing the oli supply is unaffected that is But you can't ultimately win wars, just by bombing countries, unless they're nuclear bombs of course. And it is going to be virtually impossible for the US to get boots on the ground in Iran. At the end of the day, neither Iran or the US want a war and it's about time that Netanyahu was put in his place for attempting to start one. I think the Yanks want IRGC generals dead though. And ideally would want drone plants “shutting down”. If it wasn’t an election year I’d fully expect a strike to happen with America’s blessing. As it is, I think it’s 50-50 and it definitely doesn’t have the blessing of the Americans.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 15, 2024 11:09:12 GMT
They would look to bomb them not boots on the ground , providing the oli supply is unaffected that is But you can't ultimately win wars, just by bombing countries, unless they're nuclear bombs of course. And it is going to be virtually impossible for the US to get boots on the ground in Iran. At the end of the day, neither Iran or the US want a war and it's about time that Netanyahu was put in his place for attempting to start one. They wouldn't need to 'win', they just need the shipping lanes kept open
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Apr 15, 2024 11:13:23 GMT
But you can't ultimately win wars, just by bombing countries, unless they're nuclear bombs of course. And it is going to be virtually impossible for the US to get boots on the ground in Iran. At the end of the day, neither Iran or the US want a war and it's about time that Netanyahu was put in his place for attempting to start one. They wouldn't need to 'win', they just need the shipping lanes kept open So, just bomb the fuck out of Iran and then leave it to the fate of, say, a Libya?
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Apr 15, 2024 12:18:32 GMT
They would look to bomb them not boots on the ground , providing the oli supply is unaffected that is Absolutely. The Iranian sea capability is an interesting one and they have the real potential to overwhelm even a carrier group. So it’d be interesting to know how the Yanks would plan to stop that. Apache’s would be very useful for it. But again it’s based on swarming them and hoping one boat/missile gets through to a carrier by giving them too many targets to focus on.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 15, 2024 13:58:00 GMT
They wouldn't need to 'win', they just need the shipping lanes kept open So, just bomb the fuck out of Iran and then leave it to the fate of, say, a Libya? I'm not suggesting it's a good idea or a well thought out policy Seems quite likely though
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Apr 15, 2024 14:46:10 GMT
Where are we at now? Everything just seems to be grinding along. I just don’t understand how and when this ends. Still seems surreal it’s actually happening. All the videos on X, it’s bizarre. Like a computer game. Which is scary. Ukrainian soldiers with NATO tech are better than Russians, and the West's plan was to grow supplies until the Ukrainian army could kill russians quickly enough to open gaps and free their land. Then the US Republicans threw in with Putin, North Korea and Iran, and blockaded new US aid to Ukraine. So this year Ukraine doesn't have enough ammo, which leaves Putin free to blast dams, power stations and the defenders. Putin has a huge soviet reserve of tanks and vehicles to empty, he's taking most of the good kit out and is throwing it into ukrakne this year. If he can kill or force enough Ukrainians to flee before European ammunition supplies reach the needed level, then he might be able to win. Basically the republicans have given him a window to try and win, but if ukraine doesn't crack and Biden and the Democrats win the 2024 election, then Putin is fucked because the West will supply Ukraine and Russia will have used up almost all of its decades of Soviet production. Sorry for the long post... It's basically what I've been saying for years. Putin only has hope because of western weakness and pro-dictatorship groups in the West, his most important allies on Earth being MAGA Republicans. I think that is a fair assessment of where things stand The biggest plus for Ukraine right now is their resolve to defend themselves, if that weakens because they believe they can no longer win it would be a major turning point. Russia's continued pounding of strategic targets like Energy are aimed at weakening that resolve I agree Ukraine Soldiers are better trained, led and equipped but they are outnumbered 10 to 1 and mass matters, especially when the enemy is prepared to commit unlimited Troops into the meat grinder. They are also out equipped by about 5 to 1 With the killing season about to start in earnest with the change in weather there is no possibility of a Ukraine advance like was hoped last summer. Rather it will be a defence of a Russian onslaught. The border with Russia is long and to defend it with inferior numbers and equipment will be problematic. Ukraine also doesn't know where Russia will mount the offensive so needs to spread its resources. Most likely is Kharkiv Ukraine's second City or Zaporizhzhia both very close to the border. If either were lost it would inflict massive moral as well as economic damage on Ukraine We have seen the toll on Ukraine resources to defend Bakhmut, and Avdiivka in the Donbas with disproportionate losses of manpower inflicted on Russian Troops but ultimately both were lost. I am pessimistic that without major resupply of ammunition and ground equipment from primarily US the result of US election will have little consequence to the alteration of the War. I hope I'm wrong
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Apr 15, 2024 16:06:10 GMT
The US won't take on Iran in a conventional war. What will they do? More sanctions, the last thing they'd want is the middle east to blow up into a war they cant' afford
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 15, 2024 16:18:32 GMT
More sanctions, the last thing they'd want is the middle east to blow up into a war they cant' afford that will be the first option yes depends on what Iran do re the Strait Of Hurmuz
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Apr 15, 2024 17:16:23 GMT
I think that is a fair assessment of where things stand The biggest plus for Ukraine right now is their resolve to defend themselves, if that weakens because they believe they can no longer win it would be a major turning point. Russia's continued pounding of strategic targets like Energy are aimed at weakening that resolve I agree Ukraine Soldiers are better trained, led and equipped but they are outnumbered 10 to 1 and mass matters, especially when the enemy is prepared to commit unlimited Troops into the meat grinder. They are also out equipped by about 5 to 1 With the killing season about to start in earnest with the change in weather there is no possibility of a Ukraine advance like was hoped last summer. Rather it will be a defence of a Russian onslaught. The border with Russia is long and to defend it with inferior numbers and equipment will be problematic. Ukraine also doesn't know where Russia will mount the offensive so needs to spread its resources. Most likely is Kharkiv Ukraine's second City or Zaporizhzhia both very close to the border. If either were lost it would inflict massive moral as well as economic damage on Ukraine We have seen the toll on Ukraine resources to defend Bakhmut, and Avdiivka in the Donbas with disproportionate losses of manpower inflicted on Russian Troops but ultimately both were lost. I am pessimistic that without major resupply of ammunition and ground equipment from primarily US the result of US election will have little consequence to the alteration of the War. I hope I'm wrong The comments from Ukrainian units and the experts make me think the 5 most important things this year are, in order: 1. Remaining Ukrainian soldier numbers - Ukraine has people out of uniform, but do they have enough in?
2. Artillery and mortar shells - hopefully the Czechs have solved this, mortars are a worry. 3. Air power - Ukraine needs F-16s asap plus something like more long-range Patriot or Meteor. 4. Drones versus electronic warfare - the wildcard.
5. How good are Ukraine's rear fortifications - they're working on these at least.
I don't think armour is a huge issue for 2024, like you say, Ukraine can't attack much without it, but the 5 above seem more important.
The shifts since 2023 are the North Koreans and Republicans throwing in hard with Putin, and the glide bombs. Who knows what'll happen this year.
The drones vs jamming seems like it could flip the whole story and let one side make (or stop) a lot of gains. I don't think that's predictable.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Apr 15, 2024 17:22:11 GMT
I am pessimistic that without major resupply of ammunition and ground equipment from primarily US the result of US election will have little consequence to the alteration of the War. I hope I'm wrong European artillery ammo production should be pretty close to russian next year. Our ammo+guns and Ukrainian gunners are just better. It's just whether Ukraine can hold this year (most likely they lose more of Donbas IMO, but anything could happen) and whether European politicians want to have peace at the cheapest possible price, or whether they want to keep making things more expensive and bloody. Vehicles are harder without the yanks but we can ask our MPs to send the Challenger-2s and Warriors that will be decommissioned from our forces soon. Ukraine could keep going an extra half year plus with just our ~60 tanks and 600+ Warriors.
|
|