|
Post by lordb on May 24, 2022 18:40:39 GMT
Yeah that seems to be the alternative. Right now it looks like that means a lot less death and suffering overall IMO, so if I was Ukrainian I'd pick the fight just on that basis. Nevermind that surrendering would mean extermination of Ukrainians and their culture. Ukraine can still kick the Russian army to shit if we just give them the equipment. You really are an idiot, like many of you on here that think by keep giving Ukraine more and more weapons they can beat Russia, they can't it just prolongs the war and kills more and more Ukrainians. Afghanistan beat Soviets, they don't need to 'win', they just need to hang on in there Eventually Russia will go home
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on May 24, 2022 18:52:05 GMT
You really are an idiot, like many of you on here that think by keep giving Ukraine more and more weapons they can beat Russia, they can't it just prolongs the war and kills more and more Ukrainians. Afghanistan beat Soviets, they don't need to 'win', they just need to hang on in there Eventually Russia will go home Correct
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on May 24, 2022 18:59:35 GMT
You really are an idiot, like many of you on here that think by keep giving Ukraine more and more weapons they can beat Russia, they can't it just prolongs the war and kills more and more Ukrainians. Afghanistan beat Soviets, they don't need to 'win', they just need to hang on in there Eventually Russia will go home If they annex the Donbas region I think they’re there forever
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 24, 2022 20:51:54 GMT
I would love that to be the case, but, unusually for me as I’m a natural optimist, I’m pessimistic about Ukraine’s prospect in the east of their country. I've posted less recently but read a bit more from various sources whilst holed up in a hotel with work and I've come to the conclusion that the stories of Ukranian resistance and Russian setbacks have both been exaggerated slightly. A lot was made of Kyiv not been taken but I'm not sure that it was ever a serious objective of the Russian military. The Black Sea region seems well and truly secured by the Russian navy, Melitopol, Kherson, Mariupol have been taken and I see nothing to suggest that Severodonetsk and Slovyansk in Luhansk won't succumb either. I wouldn't want to downplay some of Russia setbacks, particularly the likes of the Moskva sinking but was this more symbolic than a real strategic kick in the nuts in hindsight? They have certainly suffered losses in excess of what they would envisaged, and with that in mind and the current situation I believe both parties will be secretly keen to get back round the negotiating table and come up with an arrangement whereby they "save face" as much as possible.............. You’ve bought the Kyiv was a feint stuff? They tried to end the war in 4 days and failed. Their goals have changed because they failed to achieve them. If they just wanted the Donbas to start with that’s what they would have done. The Moskva provided SAM cover for the whole of southern Ukraine. It took a massive capability away from Russia.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 24, 2022 20:57:40 GMT
Alternative is a war of attrition though isn't it with civilians caught up in the middle of it all. Unless the Russians themselves remove Putin, there's no way he can simply back down with nothing to show for it. Yeah that seems to be the alternative. Right now it looks like that means a lot less death and suffering overall IMO, so if I was Ukrainian I'd pick the fight just on that basis. Nevermind that surrendering would mean extermination of Ukrainians and their culture. Ukraine can still kick the Russian army to shit if we just give them the equipment. Anything bar Russia being booted out of the country is bowing down to Russian propaganda imo. You give them the Donbas, then what? It’s not the answer. They’ve scaled back so much because they tried massive operations and couldn’t cope. Thinking Kyiv, Sumy and Kharkiv was a feint (as some seem to be on here) is buying their propaganda. Why did they send their elite troops to the airfield on the outskirts? Why amass thousands of BTGs in Belarus? It was a full on assault to end the war in 4 days. It’s laughable. This sums it up for me.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 24, 2022 21:01:36 GMT
It’s going swimmingly for Russia:
|
|
|
Post by somersetstokie on May 24, 2022 21:07:19 GMT
Whatever we are being fed at present, the picture for Ukraine is not good. Whether it is the slow drip of intelligence reports, or perhaps the lack of them, but I get the impression that despite their efforts, the tide is beginning to turn against Ukraine. They seem to be very much on the back foot, and being pressured on all fronts.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 24, 2022 21:14:52 GMT
Whatever we are being fed at present, the picture for Ukraine is not good. Whether it is the slow drip of intelligence reports, or perhaps the lack of them, but I get the impression that despite their efforts, the tide is beginning to turn against Ukraine. They seem to be very much on the back foot, and being pressured on all fronts. They’re losing ground in the east for sure. But Russia has scaled back their operation massively because they couldn’t do the big stuff. They didn’t have the command structures for it and still don’t. They’ve even made the area they were targeting in the east smaller to cope with that. They have visually confirmed lost 699 tanks. So there will be more. They’ve lost 20k+ troops. All whilst Ukraine gets better systems, loses the odd km a day and trains more troops. Russia have got that desperate they have sent 10 of their newest BMPT terminators. Why only 10? It’s all they’ve got. It’s a sign of desperation. Yeah they’re not being pushed back but all this defeatist talk is odd. It’s exactly what Putin would want. They’ve generally been hammered.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 24, 2022 22:55:32 GMT
I've posted less recently but read a bit more from various sources whilst holed up in a hotel with work and I've come to the conclusion that the stories of Ukranian resistance and Russian setbacks have both been exaggerated slightly. A lot was made of Kyiv not been taken but I'm not sure that it was ever a serious objective of the Russian military. The Black Sea region seems well and truly secured by the Russian navy, Melitopol, Kherson, Mariupol have been taken and I see nothing to suggest that Severodonetsk and Slovyansk in Luhansk won't succumb either. I wouldn't want to downplay some of Russia setbacks, particularly the likes of the Moskva sinking but was this more symbolic than a real strategic kick in the nuts in hindsight? They have certainly suffered losses in excess of what they would envisaged, and with that in mind and the current situation I believe both parties will be secretly keen to get back round the negotiating table and come up with an arrangement whereby they "save face" as much as possible.............. You’ve bought the Kyiv was a feint stuff? They tried to end the war in 4 days and failed. Their goals have changed because they failed to achieve them. If they just wanted the Donbas to start with that’s what they would have done. The Moskva provided SAM cover for the whole of southern Ukraine. It took a massive capability away from Russia. Kyiv is a symbolic city, I absolutely don't believe Russia wanted to turn it to rubble. I'm not saying they wouldn't have taken the opportunity to advance if it was there, but it's very simplistic to say "if they just wanted Donbas that's what they would have done" The Ukranian forces fighting on multiple fronts means that their ability to defend the Donbas region is hampered, that's just the tactics of armed conflict. Russia has suffered setbacks, but I've seen nothing to suggest that they aren't winning the war on the ground or in the air. Don't be surprised to see Ukranian troops retreating from Donbas to head to places like Kherson and the surrounding areas in the next few days, where poorly equipped national guard troops are struggling. I know that doesn't fit the narrative that's being painted and I hope I'm wrong but I'm simply commenting on what I read from sources that I would deem to be about as accurate as you can get under these circumstances, I try and avoid "propaganda" from both sides where possible. Conversations about a potential "deal" will have been had between Washington, London and Europe of that I have no doubt.......
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 24, 2022 23:03:37 GMT
You’ve bought the Kyiv was a feint stuff? They tried to end the war in 4 days and failed. Their goals have changed because they failed to achieve them. If they just wanted the Donbas to start with that’s what they would have done. The Moskva provided SAM cover for the whole of southern Ukraine. It took a massive capability away from Russia. Kyiv is a symbolic city, I absolutely don't believe Russia wanted to turn it to rubble. I'm not saying they wouldn't have taken the opportunity to advance if it was there, but it's very simplistic to say "if they just wanted Donbas that's what they would have done" The Ukranian forces fighting on multiple fronts means that their ability to defend the Donbas region is hampered, that's just the tactics of armed conflict. Russia has suffered setbacks, but I've seen nothing to suggest that they aren't winning the war on the ground or in the air. Don't be surprised to see Ukranian troops retreating from Donbas to head to places like Kherson and the surrounding areas in the next few days, where poorly equipped national guard troops are struggling. I know that doesn't fit the narrative that's being painted and I hope I'm wrong but I'm simply commenting on what I read from sources that I would deem to be about as accurate as you can get under these circumstances. Conversations about a potential "deal" will have been had between Washington, London and Europe of that I have no doubt....... They didn’t want to turn it to rubble. They wanted a 4 day win, didn’t get it so then had no other plan in their book bar what they’ve been doing in Syria. Turn cities to rubble. It wasn’t a feint. It was their number one goal, regime change. They’ve been pushed back from Kyiv, Mykolaiv, Kharkiv and Sumy. They haven’t got air supremacy. Which was unthinkable at the start of this. They’ve lost 699 tanks that have been visually confirmed so that in reality is pushing 1000 tanks. They tried a complicated multi front approach and it absolutely failed. They’ve even had to make the area of operations in the Donbas smaller to cope. Ukraine is losing tens of KMs in the east at most. It’s not ideal but it’s not this end of days picture that the extreme left tanky lot or the extreme right fascist lot want to portray. And Russia hasn’t suffered setbacks, they have suffered defeats. Who are the sources out of interest?
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 24, 2022 23:07:11 GMT
This sums my frustration with these last few pages up and people buying weak propaganda.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 24, 2022 23:15:27 GMT
Kyiv is a symbolic city, I absolutely don't believe Russia wanted to turn it to rubble. I'm not saying they wouldn't have taken the opportunity to advance if it was there, but it's very simplistic to say "if they just wanted Donbas that's what they would have done" The Ukranian forces fighting on multiple fronts means that their ability to defend the Donbas region is hampered, that's just the tactics of armed conflict. Russia has suffered setbacks, but I've seen nothing to suggest that they aren't winning the war on the ground or in the air. Don't be surprised to see Ukranian troops retreating from Donbas to head to places like Kherson and the surrounding areas in the next few days, where poorly equipped national guard troops are struggling. I know that doesn't fit the narrative that's being painted and I hope I'm wrong but I'm simply commenting on what I read from sources that I would deem to be about as accurate as you can get under these circumstances. Conversations about a potential "deal" will have been had between Washington, London and Europe of that I have no doubt....... They didn’t want to turn it to rubble. They wanted a 4 day win, didn’t get it so then had no other plan in their book bar what they’ve been doing in Syria. Turn cities to rubble. It wasn’t a feint. It was their number one goal, regime change. They’ve been pushed back from Kyiv, Mykolaiv, Kharkiv and Sumy. They haven’t got air supremacy. Which was unthinkable at the start of this. They’ve lost 699 tanks that have been visually confirmed so that in reality is pushing 1000 tanks. They tried a complicated multi front approach and it absolutely failed. They’ve even had to make the area of operations in the Donbas smaller to cope. Ukraine is losing tens of KMs in the east at most. It’s not ideal but it’s not this end of days picture that the extreme left tanky lot or the extreme right fascist lot want to portray. And Russia hasn’t suffered setbacks, they have suffered defeats. Who are the sources out of interest? The minimum aim was the Donbas region including all major Black Sea ports and the Crimean corridor, anything on top was a bonus. The outcome will be the Donbas region including all major Black Sea ports and the Crimean corridor , it may take a few weeks or months and I hope and pray there's minimal casualties but it will happen............
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 24, 2022 23:24:38 GMT
They didn’t want to turn it to rubble. They wanted a 4 day win, didn’t get it so then had no other plan in their book bar what they’ve been doing in Syria. Turn cities to rubble. It wasn’t a feint. It was their number one goal, regime change. They’ve been pushed back from Kyiv, Mykolaiv, Kharkiv and Sumy. They haven’t got air supremacy. Which was unthinkable at the start of this. They’ve lost 699 tanks that have been visually confirmed so that in reality is pushing 1000 tanks. They tried a complicated multi front approach and it absolutely failed. They’ve even had to make the area of operations in the Donbas smaller to cope. Ukraine is losing tens of KMs in the east at most. It’s not ideal but it’s not this end of days picture that the extreme left tanky lot or the extreme right fascist lot want to portray. And Russia hasn’t suffered setbacks, they have suffered defeats. Who are the sources out of interest? The minimum aim was the Donbas region including all major Black Sea ports and the Crimean corridor, anything on top was a bonus. The outcome will be the Donbas region including all major Black Sea ports and the Crimean corridor , it may take a few weeks or months and I hope and pray there's minimal casualties but it will happen............ Their main aim was regime change. I can’t believe you have bought the crap about the Kyiv front being a feint. It just clearly wasn’t. They won’t stop there if they get that far. And they’ve struggled to get 20kms in the Donbas in the last two weeks. What makes you think they can sweep across the country in that short of time? They’ve literally had to make the Donbas operations smaller for them to gain small gains. That’s why this whole talk of being nice with them is bullshit. We won’t have a better chance of destroying Russia militarily. And Ukraine are doing it quite well. I’m still shocked you’ve bought this propaganda. Presumably from some weak minded ultra leftist going off the way you swing politically. Frightening.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 24, 2022 23:39:08 GMT
The minimum aim was the Donbas region including all major Black Sea ports and the Crimean corridor, anything on top was a bonus. The outcome will be the Donbas region including all major Black Sea ports and the Crimean corridor , it may take a few weeks or months and I hope and pray there's minimal casualties but it will happen............ Their main aim was regime change. I can’t believe you have bought the crap about the Kyiv front being a feint. It just clearly wasn’t. They won’t stop there if they get that far. And they’ve struggled to get 20kms in the Donbas in the last two weeks. What makes you think they can sweep across the country in that short of time? They’ve literally had to make the Donbas operations smaller for them to gain small gains. That’s why this whole talk of being nice with them is bullshit. We won’t have a better chance of destroying Russia militarily. And Ukraine are doing it quite well. I’m still shocked you’ve bought this propaganda. Presumably from some weak minded ultra leftist going off the way you swing politically. Frightening. I've bought nothing I have no idea what you're banging on about, "weak minded ultra leftist" what the fuck? Propaganda appears from all angles during conflict, the truth is usually somewhere in the middle. Talk of Russia's demise and of Ukranian resistance are in my opinion both exaggerated. I can tell you that Ukraine will drive Russia back out of their country and declare victory if you want me to, it still doesn't mean I think it to be true. Unless something changes, whether that be direct NATO intervention, a huge influx of high tech modern weaponry or Putin is taken out by his trusted circle this will remain a war of attrition, and one that will end with Russia taking the aforementioned regions in one form or another. I've never suggested they can sweep through the country so no idea where you're getting that from, I actually stated from the off that the Russian military is incapable of sweeping through Ukraine and the surrounding countries, fighting numerous wars on multiple fronts is simply pie in the sky in it's current state. But it's sophisticated and resilient enough to grind down the Ukranian forces where necessary.............
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 24, 2022 23:51:32 GMT
Their main aim was regime change. I can’t believe you have bought the crap about the Kyiv front being a feint. It just clearly wasn’t. They won’t stop there if they get that far. And they’ve struggled to get 20kms in the Donbas in the last two weeks. What makes you think they can sweep across the country in that short of time? They’ve literally had to make the Donbas operations smaller for them to gain small gains. That’s why this whole talk of being nice with them is bullshit. We won’t have a better chance of destroying Russia militarily. And Ukraine are doing it quite well. I’m still shocked you’ve bought this propaganda. Presumably from some weak minded ultra leftist going off the way you swing politically. Frightening. I've bought nothing I have no idea what you're banging on about, "weak minded ultra leftist" what the fuck? Propaganda appears from all angles during conflict, the truth is usually somewhere in the middle. Talk of Russia's demise and of Ukranian resistance are in my opinion both exaggerated. I can tell you that Ukraine will drive Russia back out of their country and declare victory if you want me to, it still doesn't mean I think it to be true. Unless something changes, whether that be direct NATO intervention, a huge influx of high tech modern weaponry or Putin is taken out by his trusted circle this will remain a war of attrition, and one that will end with Russia taking the aforementioned regions in one form or another. I've never suggested they can sweep through the country so no idea where you're getting that from, I actually stated from the off that the Russian military is incapable of sweeping through Ukraine and the surrounding countries, fighting numerous wars on multiple fronts is simply pie in the sky in it's current state. But it's sophisticated and resilient enough to grind down the Ukranian forces where necessary............. You claimed the sinking of the Moskva was mainly symbolic. That’s buying Russian propaganda. It was a warship that carried 40 odd s300 SAM missile systems and provided air cover for southern Ukraine. It was a major strategic loss for them. You think Kyiv was a feint for crying out loud. That’s just naive. I don’t want to be told anything. I just don’t like seeing people swallowing propaganda from one of our biggest enemies. I think it will carrying on being the grind it is for quite some time. Russia doesn’t have the manpower to carry this on. It’s not ww2. It’s not sophisticated in the slightest. The west have in their analysis before this have given them far too much credit. They have shown time and time again that they’re a second rate outfit. Like I said, they haven’t even got air supremacy and the Ukraine Air Force still has fighters they can use. That’s just insane and shows complete Russian incompetence. What we as the west can’t do is get bored and let some little setbacks and that’s what is happening atm change the course of what has to happen. And that’s Russian defeat.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 24, 2022 23:59:47 GMT
Re Kyiv being a feint, it’s just silly
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 25, 2022 0:16:33 GMT
I've bought nothing I have no idea what you're banging on about, "weak minded ultra leftist" what the fuck? Propaganda appears from all angles during conflict, the truth is usually somewhere in the middle. Talk of Russia's demise and of Ukranian resistance are in my opinion both exaggerated. I can tell you that Ukraine will drive Russia back out of their country and declare victory if you want me to, it still doesn't mean I think it to be true. Unless something changes, whether that be direct NATO intervention, a huge influx of high tech modern weaponry or Putin is taken out by his trusted circle this will remain a war of attrition, and one that will end with Russia taking the aforementioned regions in one form or another. I've never suggested they can sweep through the country so no idea where you're getting that from, I actually stated from the off that the Russian military is incapable of sweeping through Ukraine and the surrounding countries, fighting numerous wars on multiple fronts is simply pie in the sky in it's current state. But it's sophisticated and resilient enough to grind down the Ukranian forces where necessary............. You claimed the sinking of the Moskva was mainly symbolic. That’s buying Russian propaganda. It was a warship that carried 40 odd s300 SAM missile systems and provided air cover for southern Ukraine. It was a major strategic loss for them. You think Kyiv was a feint for crying out loud. That’s just naive. I don’t want to be told anything. I just don’t like seeing people swallowing propaganda from one of our biggest enemies. I think it will carrying on being the grind it is for quite some time. Russia doesn’t have the manpower to carry this on. It’s not ww2. It’s not sophisticated in the slightest. The west have in their analysis before this have given them far too much credit. They have shown time and time again that they’re a second rate outfit. Like I said, they haven’t even got air supremacy and the Ukraine Air Force still has fighters they can use. That’s just insane and shows complete Russian incompetence. What we as the west can’t do is get bored and let some little setbacks and that’s what is happening atm change the course of what has to happen. And that’s Russian defeat. Symbolic in the sense that I don't believe it will affect the overall result of the conflict. Of course it was a setback, in the same way HMS Sheffield sinking was a setback in 1982 for example. The debate just ceases when you keep telling someone they're naive and swallowing Russian propaganda because they have a different take on things. A lot of what you've typed their is fairly trite and meaningless, so I think i'll go to bed and leave it at that........
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 25, 2022 6:58:15 GMT
You claimed the sinking of the Moskva was mainly symbolic. That’s buying Russian propaganda. It was a warship that carried 40 odd s300 SAM missile systems and provided air cover for southern Ukraine. It was a major strategic loss for them. You think Kyiv was a feint for crying out loud. That’s just naive. I don’t want to be told anything. I just don’t like seeing people swallowing propaganda from one of our biggest enemies. I think it will carrying on being the grind it is for quite some time. Russia doesn’t have the manpower to carry this on. It’s not ww2. It’s not sophisticated in the slightest. The west have in their analysis before this have given them far too much credit. They have shown time and time again that they’re a second rate outfit. Like I said, they haven’t even got air supremacy and the Ukraine Air Force still has fighters they can use. That’s just insane and shows complete Russian incompetence. What we as the west can’t do is get bored and let some little setbacks and that’s what is happening atm change the course of what has to happen. And that’s Russian defeat. Symbolic in the sense that I don't believe it will affect the overall result of the conflict. Of course it was a setback, in the same way HMS Sheffield sinking was a setback in 1982 for example. The debate just ceases when you keep telling someone they're naive and swallowing Russian propaganda because they have a different take on things. A lot of what you've typed their is fairly trite and meaningless, so I think i'll go to bed and leave it at that........ But it did, it’s removal allowed the attacks on Snake Island and will allow their planes to fly in the south. It was providing a massive air cover umbrella. Of course it was symbolic but it was highly strategic too. But that’s what has happened and it’s sad to see. This is the situation in the east. They got bogged down after initial gains in Izium 3/4 weeks ago. So made the encirclement smaller because they don’t have the means to do the bigger one. There are advancements there. But look at the map. It’s about 25kms at most in 3/4 weeks. It does like the smaller one will work but they’ve thrown everything into it and it’s still going slowly. They’re still losing mountains of material.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 25, 2022 9:02:53 GMT
700 visually confirmed tank losses for Russia. So the real number will be north of that.
It's just mad.
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on May 25, 2022 9:12:37 GMT
700 visually confirmed tank losses for Russia. So the real number will be north of that. It's just mad. Ordinarily that would be a big problem, but life is cheap in Russia and they are making huge sums of money with the oil they sell to Europe that is being paid in Roubles, which in itself is simultaneously propping up the Russian economy and damaging the Euro/EU. I'm not saying that Russia has played a blinder, but it is better prepared for the fallout than we are lead to believe.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on May 25, 2022 9:13:45 GMT
700 visually confirmed tank losses for Russia. So the real number will be north of that. It's just mad. Ordinarily that would be a big problem, but life is cheap in Russia and they are making huge sums of money with the oil they sell to Europe that is being paid in Roubles, which in itself is simultaneously propping up the Russian economy and damaging the Euro/EU. I'm not saying that Russia has played a blinder, but it is better prepared for the fallout than we are lead to believe. Life might be but tanks aren't Warships even more costly
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on May 25, 2022 9:20:14 GMT
Ordinarily that would be a big problem, but life is cheap in Russia and they are making huge sums of money with the oil they sell to Europe that is being paid in Roubles, which in itself is simultaneously propping up the Russian economy and damaging the Euro/EU. I'm not saying that Russia has played a blinder, but it is better prepared for the fallout than we are lead to believe. Life might be but tanks aren't Warships even more costly That's my point, what they are loosing in old equipment, is being paid for with money from the EU. They have the funds to replace it with more modern tanks and ships, and have plenty young people to send to the meat grinder.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on May 25, 2022 9:22:05 GMT
Life might be but tanks aren't Warships even more costly That's my point, what they are loosing in old equipment, is being paid for with money from the EU. They have the funds to replace it with more modern tanks and ships, and have plenty young people to send to the meat grinder. Think you are underestimating how expensive long wars are The longer this goes on the harder it will be for Russia to carry on
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 25, 2022 9:34:01 GMT
That's my point, what they are loosing in old equipment, is being paid for with money from the EU. They have the funds to replace it with more modern tanks and ships, and have plenty young people to send to the meat grinder. Think you are underestimating how expensive long wars are The longer this goes on the harder it will be for Russia to carry on I think the question to ponder is "will the US run out of Javelins before Russia run out of tanks?" Over a third of their stock has been sent to Ukraine and production is nigh on impossible to be ramped up quickly enough. Also whether Russia's 10,000 tanks in storage are operational or unable to function, if they're not they have a problem unless they can persuade China or another ally to assist. If they are then I think the answer to the above question is "yes they will"
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 25, 2022 9:34:32 GMT
Life might be but tanks aren't Warships even more costly That's my point, what they are loosing in old equipment, is being paid for with money from the EU. They have the funds to replace it with more modern tanks and ships, and have plenty young people to send to the meat grinder. It's not old equipment. It's their current equipment. They haven't got the manpower, people who think this is like WW2 are wrong. And their defence industry relies on western parts, which they can't get because of sanctions.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 25, 2022 9:35:36 GMT
Think you are underestimating how expensive long wars are The longer this goes on the harder it will be for Russia to carry on I think the question to ponder is "will the US run out of Javelins before Russia run out of tanks?" Over a third of their stock has been sent to Ukraine and production is nigh on impossible to be ramped up quickly enough. Also whether Russia's 10,000 tanks in storage are operational or unable to function, if they're not they have a problem unless they can persuade China or another ally to assist. If they are then I think the answer to the above question is "yes they will" Artillery is doing more damage than Javelins. It's been a war of artillery.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on May 25, 2022 9:36:25 GMT
Think you are underestimating how expensive long wars are The longer this goes on the harder it will be for Russia to carry on I think the question to ponder is "will the US run out of Javelins before Russia run out of tanks?" Over a third of their stock has been sent to Ukraine and production is nigh on impossible to be ramped up quickly enough. Also whether Russia's 10,000 tanks in storage are operational or unable to function, if they're not they have a problem unless they can persuade China or another ally to assist. If they are then I think the answer to the above question is "yes they will" It's abundantly clear that hugest swathes of Russian gear is utterly useless If 500 of those 10000 tanks are combat ready that would be a surprise
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 25, 2022 9:45:26 GMT
I think the question to ponder is "will the US run out of Javelins before Russia run out of tanks?" Over a third of their stock has been sent to Ukraine and production is nigh on impossible to be ramped up quickly enough. Also whether Russia's 10,000 tanks in storage are operational or unable to function, if they're not they have a problem unless they can persuade China or another ally to assist. If they are then I think the answer to the above question is "yes they will" It's abundantly clear that hugest swathes of Russian gear is utterly useless If 500 of those 10000 tanks are combat ready that would be a surprise Russia has been holding back it's air power, I hope I'm wrong but I think they will ramp up the use of unguided missiles and turn more areas into rubble (and ultimately kill more civilians) precisely because of the issues you and others raise........
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on May 25, 2022 10:02:07 GMT
That's my point, what they are loosing in old equipment, is being paid for with money from the EU. They have the funds to replace it with more modern tanks and ships, and have plenty young people to send to the meat grinder. It's not old equipment. It's their current equipment. They haven't got the manpower, people who think this is like WW2 are wrong. And their defence industry relies on western parts, which they can't get because of sanctions. I would not underestimate the resourcefulness of Russia, and should they resort to using brute force over high tech (which they have already past that point), then they have the means to mass produce simple but effective weapons in large numbers. To me, it feels like we are heading for a bloody stalemate.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 25, 2022 10:08:28 GMT
It's not old equipment. It's their current equipment. They haven't got the manpower, people who think this is like WW2 are wrong. And their defence industry relies on western parts, which they can't get because of sanctions. I would not underestimate the resourcefulness of Russia, and should they resort to using brute force over high tech (which they have already past that point), then they have the means to mass produce simple but effective weapons in large numbers. To me, it feels like we are heading for a bloody stalemate. I think there will be a stalemate but the only way they get new tanks is if China helps them. I posted something on here days ago that their tanks are full of French tech. That will be stopped now. The only option they will have is to get even older tanks.
|
|