Russian invasion of Ukraine

I guarantee if Ukraine strikes Moscow with these long range missiles Putin would not hesitate to nuke them the guy wouldn’t give 2 fucks what the west think
 
roubaixtuesday said:
I love these sort of posts. Simultaneously ultra confident and completely uninformed.

FYI Putin has been involved in wars in Georgia, Moldova (Transnistria) not to mention Syria and several African countries, as well as providing troops to prop up the regime in Khazakhstan. The Belarus dictatorship survives only due to Russian support and is effectively a Russian satellite state.

He's also been on a campaign to destabilise the Baltics for years, most notably Estonia.

The idea that Putin's ambitions stop at Ukraine is laughable.
Click to expand...
You missed off the occupation of parts of Azerbaijan and the influence on Armenia.

I mean, it pails into insignificance compared to the US and USSR during the Cold War, but it’s still a long list of countries actively occupied/controlled.
 
grunge said:
How many of those dictators had actively stated they want to take over more counties?

Putin’s openly stated that he wants to “return sovereignty to Europe”, and I believe he has also stated he wants the old USSR borders back, if it wasn’t him it was his cronies.
Click to expand...
Not just the USSR but Russia max including Finland and Alaska that were part of Tzarist Russia in 1867.
 
Indaparkside said:
I guarantee if Ukraine strikes Moscow with these long range missiles Putin would not hesitate to nuke them the guy wouldn’t give 2 fucks what the west think
Click to expand...
If you haven't noticed, the Ukraine doesn't strike vanity targets.
It strikes are arms depots and airfields. Ie areas that the missiles come from.
What makes you think that will change?
I think "the bridge" is more at threat right now.
 
fulabeer said:
If you haven't noticed, the Ukraine doesn't strike vanity targets.
It strikes are arms depots and airfields. Ie areas that the missiles come from.
What makes you think that will change?
I think "the bridge" is more at threat right now.
Click to expand...

The Bridge is probably at the least risk it has ever been since the start of the war, unless Ukraine feels they have been cornered and rationality goes out of the window.

Crimea is likely to be formally ceded by Ukraine to Russia as part of the Peace deal.
 
Good chance for North Korea to test their long range missiles. Surprised that haven't yet. Not nuclear but normal explosive warheads
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
The Bridge is probably at the least risk it has ever been since the start of the war, unless Ukraine feels they have been cornered and rationality goes out of the window.

Crimea is likely to be formally ceded by Ukraine to Russia as part of the Peace deal.
Click to expand...

I think you're probably way off.

The more damage Ukraine can do ahead of Trump the better, from a negotiating standpoint. No bridge, arguably Russia can't hold Crimea without Ukr concessions.

Never been a more important time IMO.

I doubt Ukraine has the capability though.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
The Bridge is probably at the least risk it has ever been since the start of the war, unless Ukraine feels they have been cornered and rationality goes out of the window.

Crimea is likely to be formally ceded by Ukraine to Russia as part of the Peace deal.
Click to expand...
As its being used to supply the invading force, why would it not be a target? You do realise Ukraine have made several attempts to destroy it in the past, what has changed?
 
roubaixtuesday said:
I think you're probably way off.

The more damage Ukraine can do ahead of Trump the better, from a negotiating standpoint. No bridge, arguably Russia can't hold Crimea without Ukr concessions.

Never been a more important time IMO.

I doubt Ukraine has the capability though.
Click to expand...

They don't have the capability and that is why the Bridge was never taken out besides the relatively minor bombings.

It would require a 1st class army and marine commando capable of mounting an amphibious assault and With precision and speed.

Too slow and they would allow time for Russia to resupply, bed down and bring in reinenforcements or lay booby traps and turn it into a urban warfare nightmare.

Crimea is going to be ceded because it's one of the territories occupied by Russia which Ukraine has the smallest chances of capturing by military means.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
As its being used to supply the invading force, why would it not be a target? You do realise Ukraine have made several attempts to destroy it in the past, what has changed?
Click to expand...

Donald Trump getting elected less than a couple of weeks ago changed everything.

Do you really think the Ukrainian Army who have generally proved incapable or unwilling to go on the offensive (because they aren't prepared to risk the number of casualties required to regain territory), are going to recapture Crimea and large swathes of lost territory in the bitter cold of Winters before Trump takes power and pulls the plug on their military aid?
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
Do you really think the Ukrainian Army who have generally proved incapable or unwilling to go on the offensive (because they aren't prepared to risk the number of casualties required to regain territory), are going to recapture Crimea and large swathes of lost territory in the bitter cold of Winters before Trump takes power and pulls the plug on their military aid?
Click to expand...
Dropping "the bridge" would virtually prevent direct resupply (of everything - including food and fuel for those living there), and it's a long vulnerable corridor the other way. Also it was putins pet project, and would be a huge hammer blow to his ego after they spent so much time and money building it, so I'm sure it's still considered a target.

That said, I can't see Ukraine wasting precious missiles in the hope they can take it down. If it is to be taken down, it will likely be from the sea, using one (or more) of the drone ships they've developed, but it would have to be large and probably co-ordinated attack. russia wanted Crimea for use by it's black sea fleet, but they've largely ababdoned it, because the ships were vulnerable to missile attack.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
Donald Trump getting elected less than a couple of weeks ago changed everything.

Do you really think the Ukrainian Army who have generally proved incapable or unwilling to go on the offensive (because they aren't prepared to risk the number of casualties required to regain territory), are going to recapture Crimea and large swathes of lost territory in the bitter cold of Winters before Trump takes power and pulls the plug on their military aid?
Click to expand...
That wasn't really an answer to my question tho was it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top