You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Russian invasion of Ukraine
- Thread starter feedmpenzaandhewillscore
- Start date
Churchlawtonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Dec 2013
- Messages
- 14,857
That's not logical? If they couldn't take the bridge out completely I'm sure they would. Otherwise they are just allowing the Russians to use it more, to reinforce their positions.Think Ukraine letting the Russians know that anytime they want to take the Kerch Bridge out,they will.
Kerch getting hit....not the bridge.
Slava Ukraini.
No idea why its not been taken out,they have had the missiles to do it for months....and i mean before Storm Shadow turned up.That's not logical? If they couldn't take the bridge out completely I'm sure they would. Otherwise they are just allowing the Russians to use it more, to reinforce their positions.
There must be a method behind the madness?
Slava Ukraini.
Have a look at HRIM-2 Missile mate.That's not logical? If they couldn't take the bridge out completely I'm sure they would. Otherwise they are just allowing the Russians to use it more, to reinforce their positions.
It's Ukraines own.......A Ballistic missile with a range of up to 500km with a 500kg warhead.
It will destroy Kerch Bridge,no messing.
Why they have not done it baffles me.
Slava Ukraini.
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 27,977
I see method in the madness.That's not logical? If they couldn't take the bridge out completely I'm sure they would. Otherwise they are just allowing the Russians to use it more, to reinforce their positions.
You take it out when pressure on the Russian line is nearly unbearable to tip logistical struggle over the edge to catastrophe.
Prior to that you toy with the Russians so they use stacks of equipment and resources to protect the bridge rather than the front.
Crimea can only be defended at massive cost
if both sides have sufficent forces, Crimea can only be defended if the land bridge to your main forces still exists. Once that has gone your forces in Crimea are sitting ducks. This was proven twice in WW2, once by the Russians and then later by the Germans. If you're cut off you lose the lot. In 2014 Ukraine simply didn't have enough forces to stop the Russians.
Last edited:
"When the Crimean bridge falls and when the land corridor is cut, thousands of civilians will not be able to quickly leave the peninsula. Therefore, I am appealing to Russian civilians. Staying in Ukrainian Crimea is dangerous for you. Leave. Do not neglect.", - Vereschuk.
Slava Ukraini.
Slava Ukraini.
cleavers
Moderator
Sounds like it might not be very long for the bridge."When the Crimean bridge falls and when the land corridor is cut, thousands of civilians will not be able to quickly leave the peninsula. Therefore, I am appealing to Russian civilians. Staying in Ukrainian Crimea is dangerous for you. Leave. Do not neglect.", - Vereschuk.
Slava Ukraini.
mancity2012_eamo
Well-Known Member
Don’t particularly like Varadker but he nailed our colours to the mast regarding Russia and Putin last week.
The FAI have done the same today.
No Irish team at any age group will play Russia no matter what FIFA say.
Like I say, I like neither Varadker nor the FAI but they are right.
The FAI have done the same today.
No Irish team at any age group will play Russia no matter what FIFA say.
Like I say, I like neither Varadker nor the FAI but they are right.
Possibly....hope so anyway.Sounds like it might not be very long for the bridge.
Today been srangely quiet....really strange.
Slava Ukraini.
cleavers
Moderator
I think they're just leaving the (russian) civilians a way out.Possibly....hope so anyway.
Today been srangely quiet....really strange.
Slava Ukraini.