If Russia invades Ukraine pt 2

lotr10 said:
It's like the Biden administration doesn't understand even the most basic elements of a foreign policy conducted in support of American interests. China & Russia joining up was never in our interests. In fact a competent foreign policy would be working tirelessly to keep those two at each others throats. I guess hating Putin and supporting Ukraine trump everything else.

BTW, check this out!

www.americanthinker.com

After billions in US aid (including a recent $1-billion pledge), South Africa is conducting joint military exercises with Russia and China

South Africa, alas, is not our friend. Despite decades of financial and moral support from the United States, South Africa is drifting into alignment with our rivals for global supremacy. Daniel Greenfield reports for Front...
www.americanthinker.com www.americanthinker.com

In November 2022, Climate Envoy John Kerry announced a giveaway of $1 billion in foreign aid to South Africa. The failed racist state which regularly suffers blackouts from its socialist power system was being offered billions to subsidize electric cars and green energy.

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen claimed that “President Ramaphosa and the South African Government have created a bold plan identifying a clear strategy for achieving South Africa’s most ambitious climate targets.”

In reward for that $1 billion and the billions in foreign aid dispensed over the years, South Africa is conducting joint military exercises with China and Russia.
Click to expand...
South America is on it's way. Look at Mexico
 
And while we're talking China & Russia check this out. It's a little bit in the weeds but the basic point is that China has a lot to gain by partnering up with Russia. Maybe as much or more then Russia has to gain.

smoothiex12.blogspot.com

China's Naval Problem.

I already mentioned it many times, including today in my latest video. Here is the illustration to China's naval (maritime) problem, and to...
smoothiex12.blogspot.com smoothiex12.blogspot.com

Now, Xi is in Moscow. Four and a half hour they talk with Putin God only knows what about. Tomorrow the "narrow format" meeting heavily dominated by Russian Military-Industrial Complex people and something tells me that this will be on the table:




This is sheer 1,000 kilometers dash at M=2.5 and then the launch of M=9 Kinzhal with the range of 2,000 kilometers. The targeting for the strike on CBGs is not such a big of a deal anymore. Chinese have their own thing, Russians have Liana operational. So, 1,000+2,000 = 3,000 kilometers and you cannot shoot down Kinzhal, unless it breaks down by itself, but the salvo of 6-8 Kinzhals. Boy, I do not envy those people on the carriers. You see how simple it is? China desperately needs to sort this issue out and I am anticipating first official statements tomorrow anxiously. It doesn't mean that hey will come up with the list--no, absolutely not, but we need to look for those subtle signs and words which will allow us to conclude that some huge steps have been undertaken by Putin and Xi.
 
Indiandad said:
Why is it a joke?
Click to expand...

Kyiv reporting on Russian losses? If you don’t understand why this is problematic to say the least, there is not point going forward on this specific issue.
Do you have a nonUkraine, noneUS, nonRussian source on the casualties of this war?
 
WJ-OSU-STEELERS said:
Here is an interesting drone concept from Australia that is being used by the Ukrainians

news.yahoo.com

Australian cardboard drones already performing battlefield missions in Ukraine

Ukraine uses inexpensive, disposable, Australian-made Corvo cargo drones to perform logistical tasks, Ross Osborne, chief engineer of Melbourne-based SYPAQ, told The Australian newspaper on March 3.
news.yahoo.com news.yahoo.com
Click to expand...
1679410412565.png


Good news! I've submitted this design to Zelensky, and he is going to pay me $5mm per unit, delivered.

He's got a little extra "fun money" this month.
 
Yorktown said:
Kyiv reporting on Russian losses? If you don’t understand why this is problematic to say the least, there is not point going forward on this specific issue.
Click to expand...
Kyiv isn't allowed to report on Russian losses? Since when?
Russia reports on Ukrainian losses.
Yorktown said:
Do you have a nonUkraine, noneUS, nonRussian source on the casualties of this war?
Click to expand...
Sure I do. They are available to the public.

Pretty telling about you though that you don't know this.

Funny how your preferred media doesn't want to report those numbers.
 
lotr10 said:
Perfect timing for this article. It does a good job laying out Russia's position on and capability in using battlefield nukes. Interesting point about how if the blast is airborne Russian troops could move through the area in a day:


While some argue that Putin will never use nuclear weapons, the Kremlin’s (2020) “Basic Principles of State Policy of the Russian Federation on Nuclear Deterrence” reveal how Moscow plans to use nuclear weapons far beyond just to deter existential threats. Putin’s repeated nuclear threats are in line with Russian policy. In the escalating crisis between Russia, Ukraine, and the United States, Putin’s next move may be a low altitude air burst of a low-yield nuclear weapon.

Today, Russia possesses at least 2,000 battlefield nuclear weapons of varying yields that are launched from delivery vehicles like the Iskander-M ballistic missile, which has seen its conventional version used in Ukraine. These battlefield nuclear weapons are designed to affect small areas and achieve discreet destruction on the battlefield. They are very different from the strategic nuclear weapons which inspire Hollywood Armageddon movies.
Click to expand...
What's he waiting for then? Sounds like Putin has a large stockpile of a weapon that can guarantee victory.

Why doesn't he use it?

Why waste 200,000 Russians while holding these weapons back?
 
Indiandad said:
Kyiv isn't allowed to report on Russian losses? Since when?
Russia reports on Ukrainian losses.

Sure I do. They are available to the public.

Pretty telling about you though that you don't know this.

Funny how your preferred media doesn't want to report those numbers.
Click to expand...
So you dont have a neutral source.. you could have just said that, but you cant.
Tell me my preferred source.
 
Indiandad said:
I have no idea what your preferred choice is nor do I care.

As I stated though, clearly your preferred choice isn't giving you the numbers you're seeking.
Click to expand...
There is no specific number im looking for.. just the truth Or as close as possible. This is only going to come from a independent source.
 
Gulliotine said:
I'd still guess it was your fault, but yeah, that was a bunch to nuke for no apparent reason.
Click to expand...
Same thing happened to the Lia Thomas/Transgender thread.

I don’t understand why entire threads are being removed? I can see a post being removed, but entire threads?

I definitely haven’t been around as much because I’m starting to see a trend.🤷🏻‍♂️
 
Yorktown said:
There is no specific number im looking for.. just the truth Or as close as possible. This is only going to come from a independent source.
Click to expand...
Why do the casualties matter? At this point what matters is troop strength in theater.

As long as both sides still have the will to fight the losses are irrelevant.
 
Indiandad said:
What's he waiting for then? Sounds like Putin has a large stockpile of a weapon that can guarantee victory.

Why doesn't he use it?

Why waste 200,000 Russians while holding these weapons back?
Click to expand...
It's a risk/benefit calculation for Putin. Right now the risk of using nukes is greater then the benefit of reducing Russian casualties. My guess is that Putin believes he's winning. It's not going to be the shock & awe spectacle that the US military brings to the battle but in the end the Russians will win this in the good old fashioned Russian way - not giving a crap about civilian or their own military casualties.

The idea here is that if we provide the Ukrainians with enough fire were to actually win this war and drive Russia out of Ukraine then Putin will use nukes AT THAT POINT to prevent a conventional military collapse.
 
lotr10 said:
It's a risk/benefit calculation for Putin. Right now the risk of using nukes is greater then the benefit of reducing Russian casualties. My guess is that Putin believes he's winning. It's not going to be the shock & awe spectacle that the US military brings to the battle but in the end the Russians will win this in the good old fashioned Russian way - not giving a crap about civilian or their own military casualties.
Click to expand...
What's the risk?

Clearly Russia believes that using a tactical nuke could escalate the US involvement to a level they aren't comfortable with.

So your analysis that they believe using a tactical nuke is acceptable escalation is wrong. Russia is telling you this by not using them.

Maybe you should listen.
lotr10 said:
The idea here is that if we provide the Ukrainians with enough fire were to actually win this war and drive Russia out of Ukraine then Putin will use nukes AT THAT POINT to prevent a conventional military collapse.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. That moment passed at Kharkiv when the premier Russian army the 1st Tank Guards got decimated by Ukrainians in humvees with TOW launchers and the Russians lost more weapons and ammo at Izyum than Ukraine had in their military at the start of the war. Kharkiv was a devastating defeat that made Russia decide between using nukes and conscription 300,000 troops and depleting their inventory of weapons.

They didn't choose nukes then.

There's a reason why.
 
Indiandad said:
The weapons aren't keeping the war going. Ukraine's will to fight is.
The weapons are giving them the means to win.

There's a big difference.
Click to expand...
The difference is the leader of the free world would find a way to end the bloodshed. The leader of the free world would find wins for each side and end the carnage. The leader of the free world would de-escalate any future invasions.
Carter did it. Reagan did it. Clinton sort of did it.

Any idea where today’s leader is?
 
BGFalcons82 said:
The difference is the leader of the free world would find a way to end the bloodshed. The leader of the free world would find wins for each side and end the carnage. The leader of the free world would de-escalate any future invasions.
Carter did it. Reagan did it. Clinton sort of did it.

Any idea where today’s leader is?
Click to expand...
Reagan did not do it. He made sure the weapons flowed freely to Afghanistan.

Clinton sent US forces to Kosovo.

At this point Biden is taking a much more Reaganesque approach.
 
Yorktown said:
Glad i’m not a solider in your army..
Click to expand...
Lol

If your objective is to win the battle in front of you then it does not matter how many losses were sustained a year ago. What matters is the resources available at the present.

That doesn't mean you senselessly waste your resources like Wagner and Russia does. It means you worry about what you have not what you had.
 
Indiandad said:
Lol

If your objective is to win the battle in front of you then it does not matter how many losses were sustained a year ago. What matters is the resources available at the present.

That doesn't mean you senselessly waste your resources like Wagner and Russia does. It means you worry about what you have not what you had.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately if your a Russian, it has always been Russia’s tactic to lose a lot of soldiers…
 
Yorktown said:
Unfortunately if your a Russian, it has always been Russia’s tactic to lose a lot of soldiers…
Click to expand...
Yes. Russia tends to absorb what we would consider horrific losses. But they don't look at those numbers. They look at what they have available to continue the fight. And so must the West. Destroying what Russia has left is how you defeat them. Not bragging about how many you've killed. Russia doesn't care about the losses. They only care about available resources.

It is why Bahkmut is so important. It has ground down available Russian resources.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top