Ukraine - Russia Conflict

Looks like PAC 2 capability is much more than is publicized.

That means a launcher carrying 4 pac2 GEM is able to deploy much further from the radar than the 10-15km distance which is incredible to say the least. Ukraine/US are not going to put the radar at risk so it must have been near Kyiv or in Kyiv which itself is very impressive of its tracking range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMD
Yeah, I had brought this up very early during the war, that nothing good will happen if the Russians don't finish it quickly.

You either de-militarise really quickly, or it's gonna turn into a slow never-ending grind just like an insurgency. It's a problem for everybody, not just the two belligerents.
Except it's not remotely like an insurgency. In insurgencies like Iraq and Afghanistan the losses were only around 3k over 2 decades. Russia loses that in a week in Ukraine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Innominate
Another war crime:

1684953677147.png

:ROFLMAO:

 
Except it's not remotely like an insurgency. In insurgencies like Iraq and Afghanistan the losses were only around 3k over 2 decades. Russia loses that in a week in Ukraine.

Point being the main losses are soldiers, like in an insurgency. 'Cause if it's drawn-out, you can rebuild material losses, but can't replace quality soldiers as quickly as that.
 
Point being the main losses are soldiers, like in an insurgency. 'Cause if it's drawn-out, you can rebuild material losses, but can't replace quality soldiers as quickly as that.
But the loss rates are 1000x higher than an insurgency. And the material costs and hence financial costs are higher by an even larger amount.

The death rates of neither side surpass birth rates, so that won't end the war.
What in particular?
 
Last edited:
IMAGE of a fire at a thermal plant in Moscow, Russia. Not sure if this is the same as in the previously attached video.

1685002195936.png


1685002218933.png
 
But the loss rates are 1000x higher than an insurgency. And the material costs and hence financial costs are higher by an even larger amount.

The insurgencies you are referring to are in much weaker parts of the globe involving much smaller number of soldiers, so it appears less. So you are underestimating the potential of an insurgency.

If you look at Afghanistan and Iraq, the total dead on the US side was 100k in Afghanistan and 200k in Iraq. This includes US/NATO forces and allied forces. US/NATO are yet to fight an insurgency on their own. And the numbers never exceeded 200k or so concurrent fighting men, whereas in Ukraine, there are at least a million and a half soldiers involved.

Anyway, that's not my point.
 
Germany could provide Ukraine with conventionally armed cruise missiles, in the form of the air-launched Taurus KEPD 350 which offers broadly similar capabilities to the Storm Shadow . Designed to penetrate air defenses via a very low-level terrain following flight, the turbojet-powered Taurus missile carries a 1,060-pound dual-stage warhead . warhead can even be programmed to detonate on a specific pre-selected floor of a given building.

 
The insurgencies you are referring to are in much weaker parts of the globe involving much smaller number of soldiers, so it appears less. So you are underestimating the potential of an insurgency.

If you look at Afghanistan and Iraq, the total dead on the US side was 100k in Afghanistan and 200k in Iraq.
Yeah, no it wasn't, total in Iraq was 25k, mostly Iraqi security forces of new government... over 20 years.

Anyway, that's not my point.
Not sure you had one. This is not an insurgency war.