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

UA-RU-NATO War | Discussions | Jun. 1st/Sep. 13th 2025

Status
Not open for further replies.
HoldFast said:
Well, it was done with indigenous Ukrainian weapons, and not NATO supplied ones, so that was brilliant on the strategic effect. Russia can't really blame NATO for this one.

With the damage/destruction of strategic assets, I'm personally at a 4.
Click to expand...
The Ukrainians 100% relied heavily on Starlink connection for this operation, so there is that.
 
Charmender said:
Wording is essential in Russian declarations (terrorist attack).
Click to expand...
Every attack by Ukraine on Russian soil is termed a terrorist attack since they still call it a special military operation, not a war.
Charmender said:
Could lead to a quieter and more cooperative Russia during the next encounters towards a peace/truce.
Click to expand...
I don't think Putin is going to "quieten and become more cooperative".
Charmender said:
as it happened with India and Pakistan.
Click to expand...
Yellow was needed. We were at the brink of war between nuclear powers, one that has a first use policy.
 
7gtz said:
Yellow was needed. We were at the brink of war between nuclear powers, one that has a first use policy.
Click to expand...
DEFCON level is about the risk of nuclear use, not the risk of a war in general.
There was literally no sign of posturing, besides some political chatter, regarding the use of a nuke in that theater.

Not even keeping in mind the escalation ladder.

And there were plenty of military analysts saying so, and wasting their energy against the scaremongering that was being fueled by the media.

Regarding the wording of the Russians…yes I know.
 
Charmender said:
DEFCON level is about the risk of nuclear use, not the risk of a war in general.
There was literally no sign of posturing, besides some political chatter, regarding the use of a nuke in that theater.

Not even keeping in mind the escalation ladder.

And there were plenty of military analysts saying so, and wasting their energy against the scaremongering that was being fueled by the media.

Regarding the wording of the Russians…yes I know.
Click to expand...
Let's agree to disagree here. You would not see nuclear movement in either India or Pakistan like you would in the U.S. or Russia.
 
Charmender said:
DEFCON level is about the risk of nuclear use, not the risk of a war in general.
There was literally no sign of posturing, besides some political chatter, regarding the use of a nuke in that theater.

Not even keeping in mind the escalation ladder.

And there were plenty of military analysts saying so, and wasting their energy against the scaremongering that was being fueled by the media.

Regarding the wording of the Russians…yes I know.
Click to expand...
While I tend to agree with your caution. This Ind/Pak dust up was a little different. And anything between India and Pakistan is oftentimes unpredictable.
The water rights treaty and Chinas growing influence also added a level of unpredictability.
Maybe not yellow but certainly elevated.
Also I personally think the nuclear use ladders are dated because of the changing geopolitical climate and evolving national changes in nuclear doctrine.
Of course this is all just my own personal opinion.
 
Peter Griffin said:
He was going off of Public information and Ukrainian claims when he made that statement. Don't know where you got the notion that it is classified info when that number had been going around everywhere... And you might want to go and watch some interviews with the guy, he is not on good speaking terms with JD because of the War in Ukraine, not to mention yanno the fact that he went and fought hard with the Ukrainians.
Click to expand...
Thank you; I sure hope that's what he was going off (he didn't cite any sources). Also thanks for serving up more info on this guy - I wasn't aware of the circumstances you're mentioning, and they do change the way I view this post.
 
Socom7 said:
Thank you; I sure hope that's what he was going off (he didn't cite any sources). Also thanks for serving up more info on this guy - I wasn't aware of the circumstances you're mentioning, and they do change the way I view this post.
Click to expand...
The numbers are going to be hard to get a real reading on for a while, if ever knowing how Russia treats losses. He is a solid guy though, it would be great if JD learned a thing or two from him.
 
Torch said:
This is a mortal blow to the bomber portion of the Russian Triad. Personally I expect tactical air to be impressed and more/longer sub sorties. Holy Cr#p.
Click to expand...
I would not go as far as to claim a "mortal blow". Depending on who you believe, it is a moderate to heavy blow to the bomber wing of the triad. However, strategic bombers - especially old ones - are of questionable utility in a full-scale nuclear war, and moreover Russia relies mainly on land-based ICBMS for its nuclear deterrence (which perhaps explains why they would risk their strategic bombers in a conventional war with Ukraine).

I do not expect this attack to trigger a nuclear war.
 
Torch said:
Ok I’ve noted this is reports however:

What the hell is a “disproportionate retaliation” to losing over half your strategic bombers in one afternoon?

@DEFCON Warning System @RiffRaff @Irag8er @Torch @7gtz

It means Putin is REALLY pissed off and Ukraine's troops, military installations, infrastructure, and innocent civilians are going to pay a hefty price tonight or in the next few days. They can expect shock-n-awe and would best be in their bunkers and hunker-down locations.

Edit: I must have a sticky space bar on my keyboard. I need to get a new one.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Many experts I've seen claim it's a blow to Russia's capability of launching cruise missiles at Ukraine for the coming months at least until planes can be repaired and put into action. Long term? Not that much except for an embarrassment. Also, Putin is in an interesting position now, escalating as a response right before peace negotiations won't make Trump happy.
 
Cilvilt_beredskap said:
Many experts I've seen claim it's a blow to Russia's capability of launching cruise missiles at Ukraine for the coming months at least until planes can be repaired and put into action. Long term? Not that much except for an embarrassment. Also, Putin is in an interesting position now, escalating as a response right before peace negotiations won't make Trump happy.
Click to expand...
There are several important factors which should (the logic goes) discourage Putin from escalating as a response to this attack. If this sort of thing happened in late 2022 I would have been far more worried.
 
Cilvilt_beredskap said:
Many experts I've seen claim it's a blow to Russia's capability of launching cruise missiles at Ukraine for the coming months at least until planes can be repaired and put into action. Long term? Not that much except for an embarrassment. Also, Putin is in an interesting position now, escalating as a response right before peace negotiations won't make Trump happy.
Click to expand...
These planes have not been in production for years. Russia has only been able to produce 1-2 bombers per year. To replace these bombers at this rate they will take at least 15 years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom