• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

UA-RU-NATO | Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bravo said:
Urban Warfare is a high discipline. Look at the Germans in Leningrad or Stalingrad. Even with heavy Tanks like the Tiger they were not capable to take the Cities
Click to expand...
Tanks in an urban environment hinder more than help. Speed and agility are essential when conducting these missions. They are great for overwatch and with their FLIR system can see things ahead of the team advancing.
 
Peace said:
Will all of the fallout of of our actions be worth it in the end?
Click to expand...
The US doesn't have a choice in this respect. It only takes one to have a war. And China (plus Russia, plus a few other states) want a war. The sharks have smelled blood.

Either draw a line and prepare to fight, or keep ignominously ceding ground as your situation gets worse and worse - until eventually the war comes to your doorstep.
 
Socom7 said:
The US doesn't have a choice in this respect. It only takes one to have a war. And China (plus Russia, plus a few other states) want a war. The sharks have smelled blood.

Either draw a line and prepare to fight, or keep ignominously ceding ground as your situation gets worse and worse - until eventually the war comes to your doorstep.
Click to expand...
Do you think the actually want a war? Or just that this is logically the best set of circumstances to press these issues. With the optimum chances that the west is just divided enough to not stand up to them.
 
BorisBadenov said:
I believe their definition of captured does not equal ours. Rig the area (Claymores), GPS the area and fall back. When they "capture", rain hell. Problem solved.
Click to expand...
Capture, subdue, make unlivable it’s all the same.
 
Seriously said:
Do you think the actually want a war? Or just that this is logically the best set of circumstances to press these issues. With the optimum chances that the west is just divided enough to not stand up to them.
Click to expand...
The latter. A more accurate way of phrasing it would be "they would prefer to get their way without starting a war, but they're fine with starting a war if they don't".

In practice, however, the difference is academic since appeasement always leads to war down the road. Demands snowball until war eventually breaks out. It's a simple truth that appears to be entirely lost on appeaseniks. 😔
 
Irag8er said:
“Da”
Click to expand...
They are about to receive an almighty ass-whooping. Bradlys and leopards and even M1A2’s!
The Ukraines fought the Russians to a standstill with old outdated crap that was crap when it was built. Now they are about to introduce the Russians to an Air-Land battle spearheaded by Armoured Cavalry regiments.
I give them a near zero chance of stoping what is about to happen. They can surrender and live, run and be culled, fight and be killed. Thats it. IMHO
 
Torcher said:
They are about to receive an almighty ass-whooping. Bradlys and leopards and even M1A2’s!
The Ukraines fought the Russians to a standstill with old outdated crap that was crap when it was built. Now they are about to introduce the Russians to an Air-Land battle spearheaded by Armoured Cavalry regiments.
I give them a near zero chance of stoping what is about to happen. They can surrender and live, run and be culled, fight and be killed. Thats it. IMHO
Click to expand...
I’m very sorry if I put this in reports. Mobile today, too many small windows and old eyes.
 
Torcher said:
I give them a near zero chance of stoping what is about to happen. They can surrender and live, run and be culled, fight and be killed
Click to expand...
We'll see. When it comes to battle, I never believe anything until it actually happens. An enemy can be remarkably resilient. Just ask the Russians.
 
Torcher said:
I stand by my analysis of the situation. Only Tactical atomic weaponry can save the Russias and it will doom them all at the same time
Click to expand...
I’ll be honest with the security and conflict disruptions popping off in so many places it is all a little concerning.

But I’m also reminded we cannot and do not see everything that is going on.

A twilight zone moment
Imagine if you will …..
WW2 being fought with every citizen and soldier having cell phones, Twitter, and telegraph available. With 24hr global news coverage

It would have been a cluster f___
 
Seriously said:
I’ll be honest with the security and conflict disruptions popping off in so many places it is all a little concerning.

But I’m also reminded we cannot and do not see everything that is going on.

A twilight zone moment
Imagine if you will …..
WW2 being fought with every citizen and soldier having cell phones, Twitter, and telegraph available. With 24hr global news coverage

It would have been a cluster f___
Click to expand...
We need to stop funding that whack job Openheimer post haste! YOU CAN'T SPLIT ATOMS!
Build more B-17s!
 
RiffRaff said:
Russia might see this as a NATO escalation:
www.pravda.com.ua

NATO no longer allows temporary occupation of its territory in event of Russian attack – NYT

Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine has prompted the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation to restore its own military capabilities to Cold War-era levels, as well as to reconsider its approach to deterrence on its eastern borders.
www.pravda.com.ua www.pravda.com.ua
Click to expand...
I'd like to read the NYT article that Pravda is quoting. Looks interesting. And certainly a major change from the past.
 
DEFCON Warning System said:
I'd like to read the NYT article that Pravda is quoting. Looks interesting. And certainly a major change from the past.
Click to expand...
It's not The NY Times but it contains a little more info, lot's of Quotes from the Times:
www.wsws.org

NATO to surge troops to Russian border

NATO plans to deploy tens of thousands of troops to Russia’s border and as part of an effort to become a “war-fighting alliance,” the New York Times reported Monday.
www.wsws.org
 
Irag8er said:
It's not The NY Times but it contains a little more info, lot's of Quotes from the Times:
www.wsws.org

NATO to surge troops to Russian border

NATO plans to deploy tens of thousands of troops to Russia’s border and as part of an effort to become a “war-fighting alliance,” the New York Times reported Monday.
www.wsws.org
Click to expand...
This is not going to make Russia happen. In fact, it will play right into the fears it has of NATO preparing to invade.

I understand NATO's reasoning. And honestly, I probably would have done the same thing.

But this is going to make things worse.
 
DEFCON Warning System said:
This is not going to make Russia happen. In fact, it will play right into the fears it has of NATO preparing to invade.

I understand NATO's reasoning. And honestly, I probably would have done the same thing.

But this is going to make things worse.
Click to expand...
What is it they say it only takes one nation to start a war. Even if that nations reasoning is based i
Upon an unreasonable fallacy
 
DEFCON Warning System said:
This is not going to make Russia happen. In fact, it will play right into the fears it has of NATO preparing to invade.

I understand NATO's reasoning. And honestly, I probably would have done the same thing.

But this is going to make things worse.
Click to expand...

They should have done this in Poland before the war even started. When Russia was piling up their troops on their Ukraine border, NATO should have piled up a bunch of troops on the Poland/Ukraine border. We could have said it was a training mission too. That was the only way to make Russia think twice about invading.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom