- Aug 24, 2020
- 7,085
My ambition is to get one on the forum before the war ends. Wish me luck.
[Politics] Russia invades Ukraine (24/02/2022)
- Thread starter vegster
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
- Aug 24, 2020
- 7,085
Applications are invited for the following positions on the Russia invades Ukraine thread:
Expert - Russian invasions. Must have relevant experience in a) being Russian or b) invading neighbouring countries. Misplaced arrogance and brutality a bonus.
Expert - Ukraine. Must have married a Ukrainian woman (the circumstances of your meeting will never be divulged or discussed).
Expert - Military strategist. Must have military experience or be convincing enough to get away with it.
Expert - Collapse of Russian economy. This position is unlikely to appeal to real economists.
Neither have I. I was just responding to someone else's post with a possible answer. Speculation like, you know?
Yeah I'm not complaining. I'm getting the impression that the large majority of missiles got through. I'm guessing that's as expected. So my (further) speculation is that that number were fired either because
a) there were several sections to the compound that needed to be hit
b) some reinforced areas of the compound required more than one hit to do the required damage
c) the target was such a high priority that extra missiles were used to be sure of success
seagullwedgee
Well-known member
- Aug 9, 2005
- 3,065
For Russia to say it shot down 6 of 8 Storm Shadow missiles is ludicrous. These missiles contain signal scrambling invisibility capability and can be programmed accurate to 11 feet, so this was a known target scale of intelligence and it was clearly obliterated. The video shows 5 separate distinct hits here alone, and there is only the ATACMS or Storm Shadow that have that reach.
Cotton Socks
Skint Supporter
- Feb 20, 2017
- 2,152
I'd like to nominate myself as Expert Reader of Thread - My qualifications are reading but sometimes not understanding what you're all talking about, then clicking on links that are provided which generally explain things (sometimes I do have to Google though).
It is an unbalanced thread though as there doesn't seem to be anyone saying why it's perfectly acceptable to invade another country, kill thousands of civilians, forcibly remove thousands of kids & take them to another country. Indiscriminately bomb shopping centres, hospitals & a bit of rape & torture etc. Oh on 2nd thoughts someone is trying to balance it out by wittering on about UK taxation so I'm soon to become an expert with the scroll bar.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who appreciates the info you all put on here, so thanks.
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,488
Is anyone else getting genuinely worried about nuclear Armageddon? Because I am, a bit. I know Putin has been threatening this forever, but it’s never felt this real. British missiles being used to attack Russia is scary.
All kinds of scenarios playing through my mind, we’re a much softer target than the US, would they back us up if we suffered a direct nuclear hit? What about the Europe we shunned? Knowing the state of Trident with most of them out of commission all the time, would we even have the ability to respond in a timely fashion?
Why do Russia have to be such ****s?
All kinds of scenarios playing through my mind, we’re a much softer target than the US, would they back us up if we suffered a direct nuclear hit? What about the Europe we shunned? Knowing the state of Trident with most of them out of commission all the time, would we even have the ability to respond in a timely fashion?
Why do Russia have to be such ****s?
I didn't see the video (neither did you, you said) - just replying to another poster (not you!)
- Aug 24, 2020
- 7,085
None of us can see into the future. We can only guess.
Remember we are in Nato. Any strike on a Nato country will elicit a commensurate response. That is the deterrent.
Will it work with Putin ? Well it has so far. So, probably, yes. And he now knows, if he didn't already, that his air defences will not stop modern western missiles.
There is no guarantee though. That's the nature of it.
crookie
Well-known member
Was the C&C bunker for the Kursk region. Likely holding hundreds of staff officers including Senior NK officers according to Forbes, so a very high profile and prized target. Wonder how many Storm Shadows they now have left. Each SU 24 only takes 2, so a big commitment of the Ukrainian Air Force as well
rogersix
Well-known member
- Jan 18, 2014
- 8,202
So what is the answer
I'm sure some are. I'm not. Partly because worrying doesn't help, largely because it makes no sense for Russia to attack another country.
We are a softer target, but we do have nuclear capability too.
Now hold on. We voted to leave the EU, but we're still allies. Ukraine aren't in the EU, we've never been as close to them as we have to France etc, but we're helping Ukraine. The idea that Europe would stand by while Russia attacked Britain, because we left the EU, is preposterous.
I don't know where 'timely' comes into it, because a response could be simply retaliatory, with not much left to defend, but we could still repond.
That's a tough one. I think allowing them to get away with as much as we have in past years hasn't helped.
Yes, I'm worried. But then when you stop and think about it rationally, it is highly unlikely. Russia are stuck in a war that has lasted over 1000 days that was supposed to only take 3. They've lost hundreds of millions of dollars worth of equipment, over a hundred thousand soldiers, their economy is teetering on the brink with a base rate of 22%, and they under crippling sanctions which are massively impacting their ability to generate the money needed to keep going. For a country in that position to decide to declare all out war on the most powerful military alliance that has ever existed, who have the ability to destroy the world 20 times over, would be utterly insane.
Putin might be a lot of things, but I don't think he's insane. Russia using a nuclear weapon would immediately alienate its biggest allies, and bring in the whole of NATO against them. There is absolutely no way they could survive that, so it would be suicide for him and the Russian State. I don't think he fancies that, personally.
I don't think this bit matters really. It's game over for all of us either way if it gets to the point of Russia firing ICBMs at NATO members.
When Putin threatens the nuclear option I think he is talking about using a tactical nuclear weapon on the battlefield in Ukraine. It would break Ukrainian resistance immediately, and probably end that war, just like they did in Japan.
It's what happens next that is the problem. The US must know what they would do if he did. I hope we never find out, but I'd love to know what the plan is.
- Aug 7, 2003
- 8,084
It’s total and utter madness that a half dozen human cockroaches hold the future of humanity in their hands whilst hiding in their grubby lairs. You’d like to think that the other 7,999,999,994 people on the planet would make their voices heard.
- Nov 11, 2009
- 12,267
They've got plenty on kerch Bridge apparently, and I read that there's pads protecting Putins residences.
Not so many for military infrastructure or oil refineries!
Washie
Well-known member
I'm not scared of the nuclear option, as I don't think China wants the nuclear option. If Russia even send one, China will be all over them. How can China conquer the west if all the land is irradiated.
- Nov 11, 2009
- 12,267
Again who knows for sure, but many have begged to differ.
It wouldn't cause end of war from Ukraine side as they're fighting for very right to exist. Just yesterday they said that even if they did get eventually over run, they'd go into hills with guns and bombs to continue guerilla war like Taliban did in Afghanistan.
Russia wouldn't be able to capitalise if it did it on front lines, and just wiping out a town or city behind front lines, mass murdering civillians won't make Kyiv hand over rest of nation.
It would also likely illicit a western response and alienate Russia from those it currently counts as Allies, and that includes China, who it is totally reliable on and have warned against any such use.
Petraeus: US would destroy Russia’s troops if Putin uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine
Former CIA director and retired army general says Moscow’s leader is ‘desperate’ and ‘battlefield reality he faces is irreversible’
www.theguardian.com
There are enough sane(ish) people around him to stop him if he went nuclear, he may want to torch the world if he loses, I'm sure they wouldn't.