A third option is to go on defensive mode, rearm and return with more troops and tech. The Russians are fighting incredible numbers with far few troops.
Ukraine - Russia Conflict
- Thread starter randomradio
- Start date
A third option is to go on defensive mode, rearm and return with more troops and tech. The Russians are fighting incredible numbers with far few troops.
How exactly? Russia has the biggest army in Europe. They keep calling in more armour and manpower and it just gets destroyed.
It will take them a long time to re-arm with new tech. and Ukraine is cutting off their supply lines as we speak.
NATO can defend anywhere it chooses. And you were talking about NATO attacking Russia not the other way.NATO cannot defend the Baltics. Otoh, NATO can defend the Dneiper River.
NATO has no need to invade a European country, they can simply buy European countries. Only Russia is the enemy.
e) It's the only operational tank in production.
US has not bought European countries, clear differences between the US and EU were emerging before Russia made itself a unifying factor.
Yeah, so T-14 isn't nearly ready, and they are losing lots of tanks and don't have spare operational replacements.
I thought the Russian Army was missing the Red Army when I saw those Soviet flags.
Boy was I wrong
Its the Soviet Army masquerading as the Russian Army
Soviet era Equipment
Soviet era Tactics
Even Soviet era problems !!!!
My guess about the full war has come wrong. But call me nuts I still think Russia will declare war and bring to bear its full weight it cannot win anyway else.
Not when NATO works to negate all its advantages vis-a-vis Ukraine.
Boy was I wrong
Its the Soviet Army masquerading as the Russian Army
Soviet era Equipment
Soviet era Tactics
Even Soviet era problems !!!!
My guess about the full war has come wrong. But call me nuts I still think Russia will declare war and bring to bear its full weight it cannot win anyway else.
Not when NATO works to negate all its advantages vis-a-vis Ukraine.
Last edited:
But... but Pooty-Poo said any interference would be met with severe consequences. It's not that Russia is unable because they belong to NATO they can't attack them because they don't have the capability. They are not confident that if they tried would succeed. They can't even take out flood of NATO weapons in western Ukraine. If we're to believe Russia's air force propaganda/capabilities Mig-31's flying at extreme altitude could fly over Ukraine making a beeline to western Ukraine painting NATO aircraft scaring them into retreating further. Or Mig-31's taking off Crimea could take shots at ISR aircraft flying over the Black sea like the one that helped get the Moskva sunk. I'd actually would do that believing US/NATO would very likely not retaliate when it comes to hitting Russian targets in Crimea for fear of escalation. I think the Russians know they can't get close to those ISR aircraft flying over the Black sea because they are likely protected by fighters that can't be seen by mighty Mig-31 PESA radar.
Picdel and I have already discussed this, you missed it.
Russia needs to mobilise and increase their mass. They are currently fighting with far too few infantry against an enemy many times their mass. No air force either.
But, at least for now, the Russians believe that they can still finish it on their terms with their current numbers and tactics.
It's Soviet era equipment, but not tactics. The tactics are much more modern, but they are missing some of the combined armed features. Like a lot of units are dying to artillery cued using drones. But the drones would have had a hard time surviving if Pantsirs were part of the units.
They are also using combined armed tactics without an effective comm system.
The Russians have the capability, but doing it will trigger war. The problem is ISR operates in a grey area. As long as NATO says they are not providing any targeting info, even if they are, there's nothing Russia can do about it. Of course, they can always trigger a wider war with NATO.
You can't scare away ISR aircraft when there's no war, you can only bring them down.
1999 Pakistani Breguet 1150 Atlantic shootdown - Wikipedia
In any case, this was an opportune time to bring down Russia before it actually becomes strong. A 10 year later Russia would have meant weaker ISR support to Ukraine.
The US's ISR capabilities in the Pacific is why I support the SH for the Indian Navy. It's way too much of a game changer. I mean, we are talking about an ISR capability that the enemy cannot destroy without going to war. Ukraine has the same advantage over Russia. It's game changing.
To do that under Russian law, he would finally have to declare it a war. And you can increase mass, maybe, but then you have two problem:
a) Reaction of the populace who are already torching parts of his country in protest; and
b) Logistics - if your logistics are sh!t, increasing mass only increases the problem.
The more you put in, the more you stand to lose also. You see, for now, Ukraine does not have the best NATO weapons, or longer range weapons, if he goes all in, NATO could decide to supply those two. At the moment he has one foot in a bear trap, go all in, and he has two feet in it.
NATO is not going to attack Russia. I can't believe anyone thinks that. In 70+ years of existence, NATO has never invaded a country in Europe, whereas Russia has invaded many. The threat is all one way as regards invasions in Europe. The attack would be difficult from anywhere because 2,000 nukes and very large country. This is all about Russian imperialism, there is no threat in Europe from NATO, unless you attack a NATO country, then you're f*cked.
So, have they no production lines set up for T-14s? Why do they need new tanks, I thought they still have loads?
Another flying turret sighted.
Be interesting to see if any helicopters also fall victim.
That's what I mean, they will need to mobilise. With enough strength and the air force in tow, defeating the Ukrainians will not be as difficult.
It's like claiming England has not attacked Scotland in years. NATO hasn't attacked any European country because they have effectively conquered Europe. NATO is now busy attacking countries outside Europe. While Russia is busy attacking European countries that NATO hasn't conquered yet.
What on earth are you talking about? Stop saying dumb shit. Once Armata's trials are done, its serial production will begin.
Such a move risks causing riots in Russia. You can't force people to fight, they will just surrender. Airpower only works if you can do SEAD/DEAD, if you can, then it would already have worked with the 330 aircraft they originally allocated to the war. Ergo they can't do SEAD/DEAD and will just lose more aircraft and more money.
What I have seen of the Russian air force so far is by far the most pathetic out of all their forces (except maybe the navy, that's a tight one). No ability to conduct SEAD/DEAD, pathetic low altitude runs, ineffective EW/countermeasures, optics that are either ineffective or aren't being used properly (training/tech?), e.g. helicopters spamming unguided rockets in the air from low altitude, little use of heli-launched ATGMs from tree cover.
When will that be? Russia seems to parade a lot of stuff that isn't operational. And what happened to the magnificent Su-57? Hiding in a hangar.
@Picdelamirand-oil @A Person @vstol Jockey
Pretty good thread on Russian casualty estimates.
Basically estimates a little over 10% casualties of the 100,000 in deployed forces. So, less than 4000 dead.
Pretty good thread on Russian casualty estimates.
Basically estimates a little over 10% casualties of the 100,000 in deployed forces. So, less than 4000 dead.
