Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Prediction Thread: When Will Ukraine Conquer Russia

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • PLATO
    commented on 's reply
    U.S. systems are NBC capable. They are designed to operate on a nuclear battlefield, Each is equipped with an NBC system.

  • PLATO
    replied
    Originally posted by Geronimo View Post

    I think some ghastly Dr Stranglovian nuclear WMDs would go a long way to explain why Putin was so confident in attacking despite his conventional forces being so underwhelming vs NATO. If all he had was bluff I don't think he would have kept doubling down. I also don't think anyone should back down in the face of those ghastly Dr. Strangelovian WMDs.
    I think Putin's ego and Putin's friend's corruption caused him to vastly over rate his conventional military. You think he would have learned a thing or two from Saddam's "mother of all battles" thinking. Clearly, western weapons and tactics are beyond a third rate spy's military evaluation capabilities.

    WRT nuclear delivery systems...why would they be subject to less corruption than any other part of the military supply chain? Is Putin smart enough to ask himself that question?

    Leave a comment:


  • PLATO
    commented on 's reply
    Although they are playing a real game of Civ, we have played out all kinds of scenarios thousands of times. They should listen to us.

  • Geronimo
    replied
    Originally posted by N35t0r View Post
    Given that their conventional super-ultra-best west-killing weapons have so far been curiously absent from the conflict, I seriously doubt any of those exist.
    I think some ghastly Dr Stranglovian nuclear WMDs would go a long way to explain why Putin was so confident in attacking despite his conventional forces being so underwhelming vs NATO. If all he had was bluff I don't think he would have kept doubling down. I also don't think anyone should back down in the face of those ghastly Dr. Strangelovian WMDs.

    Leave a comment:


  • N35t0r
    replied
    Given that their conventional super-ultra-best west-killing weapons have so far been curiously absent from the conflict, I seriously doubt any of those exist.

    Leave a comment:


  • Geronimo
    replied
    Originally posted by BeBMan View Post
    V-weapons use.
    What are they this time around? Super-EMP nukes? I wonder how hardened (if at all) NATO countries have become against those. Zero progress at all would be bitterly disappointing but not really surprising.

    Leave a comment:


  • N35t0r
    commented on 's reply
    Yeah, that was what I meant.

    A lost Ju-88 (I think, it could have been a Henkel) over England was running low on fuel, so they decided to drop their bombs and return. These landed somewhere in London, and angry Churchill vowed to hit Berlin in return. It was risky but succeeded (at the time, the Germans weren't on a full war economy still and there were no blackout orders after dark). Hitler lost it (more) and vowed to drown London in explosives. The rest is history.

  • BeBMan
    replied
    V-weapons use.

    Leave a comment:


  • Egbert
    replied
    Originally posted by N35t0r View Post
    Ukraine blows up (part of) the bridge used by the Russian army to supply Crimea. Russia declares it a terrorist action, and proceeds to launch 61 missile strikes, 32 airstrikes and over 92 shellings with MLRS on cities all over Ukraine, including the German consulate in Kiev (it has been empty since February though). At least 19 civilians dead and over 100 wounded. The hypocrisy is incredible.

    All of this is happening while they are being forced to retreat by the Ukrainian army.

    They could be actually targeting the Ukrainian army, but it seems like they prefer to terrorize civilians.

    It is seriously depressingly sad, but the parallels to Hitler keep popping up.
    Umh. If I recall correctly the German Luftwaffe was focusing on attacking the Royal Air Force until the British bombed Berlin. Hitler then became angry and order the focus of bombing to shift to British cities. A parallel to Hitler, indeed!

    Leave a comment:


  • EPW
    replied
    Yep and there's no doubt Hitler would have nuked everything if he could. Kinda scary.

    Leave a comment:


  • N35t0r
    replied
    Ukraine blows up (part of) the bridge used by the Russian army to supply Crimea. Russia declares it a terrorist action, and proceeds to launch 61 missile strikes, 32 airstrikes and over 92 shellings with MLRS on cities all over Ukraine, including the German consulate in Kiev (it has been empty since February though). At least 19 civilians dead and over 100 wounded. The hypocrisy is incredible.

    All of this is happening while they are being forced to retreat by the Ukrainian army.

    They could be actually targeting the Ukrainian army, but it seems like they prefer to terrorize civilians.

    It is seriously depressingly sad, but the parallels to Hitler keep popping up.

    Leave a comment:


  • N35t0r
    commented on 's reply
    No, they gave those back to Russia in exchange for a Russian guarantee to respect Ukrainian borders and protect them against other nuclear-equipped countries, further demonstrating that any deals signed with Russia aren't even worth the paper they're written on.

  • N35t0r
    commented on 's reply
    Lots of armored vehicles, but the only tanks donated so far have been models that Ukraine already has (mostly from former Warsaw pact countries), in some cases in exchange from current or future equipment from the west. Like Slovenia, they sent like 30 T-55s, and in exchange Germany gave them some military vehicles, or Poland, who will be (slowly) getting new Leopard IIs dress off the production line (starting next year, match) in exchange for their old T-72s, or Slovakia sending 30 IFVs (no tanks though) in exchange for 14 older Leopard II A4s.

    The reasons are several, but mostly:
    Logistics. It's hard to supply a lot of very different tank models. Former Warsaw pact models at least share a lot of parts similarities and use the same ammo, western tanks all use NATO ammo which is incompatible. The electronics are also different. This can bring problems in the field.
    Furthermore, western tanks are generally heavier than former USSR tanks (M1A2 SEP v3 67 tonnes, Leopard 2 A7 66 tonnes, T-72B3M, T-80U and T-90M all are in the ballpark of 45-48 tonnes). This means that existing tank transport infrastructure is not required to handle them, and not all bridges and roads that can handle current tanks could support them (including military engineering pontoon bridges for use in an offensive, for example). This also creates logistics nightmares if no proper planning and preparation is done.
    Finally, and no least important, it still takes a lot of time to train not only the crews to use the new tank, but also all the support and maintenance crews that will be also needed in order for any new tanks to be able to be more than a very expensive piece of steel after the first couple of days.

    All this combined with the fact that the only western country with a stock of functioning spare tanks is the US, and M1A2s also have a further complication with their very power hungry turbine engine, which kind of relies on the amazing logistical tail that the US army can provide in order to function effectively.


    I hope that with the lull in fighting coming with the mud season, and Ukraine's more stable position, can mean something will be done in this regard soon.

  • Geronimo
    replied
    This is precisely the sort of thing we have poly OT for

    Leave a comment:


  • BeBMan
    replied
    Wild prediction: Kherson (the city) will be back in Ukrainian hands at some point this year. Siberia will declare itself independent in protest a week later or so, with Serb being crowned King of Siberia, holding grand speeches about weak westerners 24/7. Nukes will not be used as China has not authorized Putin to do so

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X