Russia(gate/bot) Russia-Ukraine War Political Discussion

[Agent23]

I think he doesn't want to stop it.

I am sorry, but I don't think I was talking to you. The warning came about due to our little exchange of pleasantries, remember.

 

[Bacle]

Oh I think he is wrong on quite a few issues.

for example




The best russian missles are not as good as they say they are, plus the corruption, plus the incompetence. MacGregor is a boomer and thus views current Russia through the lense of the soviet union. Not Russia as it is today which is a much more degraded force.

That said Russia has a lot of people, and kit and might just win through pure numbers alone, thought it would be a pyric victory at this point. Its still too soon to tell.

Pure numbers doesn't help if all they can given the mobiks is a Mosin-Nagant, a unmodified T-55, and have to ask them to provide their own medical supplies.

Plus, logsitical bottlenecks are a thing; doesn't matter how many troops you have if you cannot get them all to where you need them, when you need them.

 

[Agent23]

Then it's not carpet bombing. It's something on the borderline of terror bombing and nuisance attacks. You don't destroy a city with drones carrying less explosive than you could lift in one hand, you need thousands of sorties from massive bombers for that.
Also S-300's are a last resort weapon to use against drones, everyone knows that. A pickup with ZPU or ZSU and thermal sights can wreck a Shahed if it's in the right place.

No, that is called ground prep, as in something you can do to get rid of all those SAMs before you send in your real air force.
That and antiradiarion missiles.

Lol... If he didn't pull back, the result would have been Kharkiv counteroffensive on steroids. Ukrainians would be complaining that they have captured so many stuck vehicles that they don't know who to crew them with.

Yeah, sure, the Russians had the advantage but never presssed, never hit the transport infrastructure and power grid.
Hell, the bridges between Poland and Ukraine are still there despite there being a close, convenient location to launch strikes against them as opposed to the one to Moldova they took out.

The RussoNazis were so full of themselves that they thought Ukraine didn't get its shit in order since 2014 quite a bit, despite still keeping considerable spy networks active there.

Yeah, sure, because parts of the Ukrainian military didn't pay down their arms immediately when they saw Russians or Separatists...

But that's what happens when incompetence, corruption and yes-men are the norm in your higher leadership.

And once again we go to the usual Russia Bad narrative...

 

[Marduk]

No, that is called ground prep, as in something you can do to get rid of all those SAMs before you send in your real air force.
That and antiradiarion missiles.

If only Russia had the US Air Force to do it for them...
Fortunately for Ukraine, they aren't nearly as good at this stuff.
They also have no separate "real air force" to do SEAD\DEAD.

Yeah, sure, the Russians had the advantage but never presssed, never hit the transport infrastructure and power grid.

LOL. Never hit the power grid. Do you have memory problems?

Hell, the bridges between Poland and Ukraine are still there despite there being a close, convenient location to launch strikes against them as opposed to the one to Moldova they took out.

Bridges are a bitch to destroy properly from a standoff distance when you don't have the western air force toys. The most expensive long range toys that even many NATO countries lack.
There is this one bridge and it's Vietnam War story to illustrate how hard exactly it is to bomb a bridge effectively, even when you have guided bombs and USAF at hand.

Thanh Hóa Bridge - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Also last time i checked Poland didn't have much a river border with Ukraine. Just some rivers nearby the border, and not really locking off the border that well.
Another proposition of using massive, if possible at all amount of scarce airpower resources to merely inconvenience Ukraine.

Yeah, sure, because parts of the Ukrainian military didn't pay down their arms immediately when they saw Russians or Separatists...

And once again we go to the usual Russia Bad narrative...

Well it sure ain't good...

 

[Agent23]

If only Russia had the US Air Force to do it for them...
Fortunately for Ukraine, they aren't nearly as good at this stuff.
They also have no separate "real air force" to do SEAD\DEAD.

LOL. Never hit the power grid. Do you have memory problems?

Bridges are a bitch to destroy properly from a standoff distance when you don't have the western air force toys. The most expensive long range toys that even many NATO countries lack.

Yeah, ok, I am sure that the "siege" forces couldn't have hit the bridges on the Dnepr while they were pulling out....

There is this one bridge and it's Vietnam War story to illustrate how hard exactly it is to bomb a bridge effectively, even when you have guided bombs and USAF at hand.

Yeah, ok, 50 years out of date, before GPS/Glonass.

Thanh Hóa Bridge - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Also last time i checked Poland didn't have much a river border with Ukraine. Just some rivers nearby the border, and not really locking off the border that well.

Then why was Batrix having a fit about the Russians being on the other bank of some river called the Bug?

Another proposition of using massive, if possible at all amount of scarce airpower resources to merely inconvenience Ukraine.

Most of their rail system works on electricity, and it is a good way to demoralize and paralize the enemy, even if temporarily.

 

[Marduk]

Yeah, ok, I am sure that the "siege" forces couldn't have hit the bridges on the Dnepr while they were pulling out....

Yeah, ok, 50 years out of date, before GPS/Glonass.

GPS in military mode and with a good missile *might* be good enough for destroying bridges. Still you would prefer something with multiple guidance modes working in cooperation.
Glonass in EWAR conditions? Yeah, sure, waste your smart munitions to do light damage to a bridge with near-misses.
It's not hard to *hit* bridges, the trick is to hit a bridge in a way that will bring it down, rather than cause minor damage that can be fixed in few days.

Then why was Batrix having a fit about the Russians being on the other bank of some river called the Bug?

I don't know the discussion or its context, ask him not me.

Most of their rail system works on electricity, and it is a good way to demoralize and paralize the enemy, even if temporarily.

And they did. And the video i've linked earlier shows why the value of that is... limited, has to be weighted against the resources needed for it, and by itself cannot win a war considering historical experiences. The paralyzing being mostly limited to civilians and economy, with minimal effect on military operations.
>demoralize
If you consider Hussein or Assad as geniuses of modern warfare, sure.

 

[Cherico]

GPS in military mode and with a good missile *might* be good enough for destroying bridges. Still you would prefer something with multiple guidance modes working in cooperation.
Glonass in EWAR conditions? Yeah, sure, waste your smart munitions to do light damage to a bridge with near-misses.
It's not hard to *hit* bridges, the trick is to hit a bridge in a way that will bring it down, rather than cause minor damage that can be fixed in few days.

I don't know the discussion or its context, ask him not me.

And they did. And the video i've linked earlier shows why the value of that is... limited, has to be weighted against the resources needed for it, and by itself cannot win a war considering historical experiences. The paralyzing being mostly limited to civilians and economy, with minimal effect on military operations.
>demoralize
If you consider Hussein or Assad as geniuses of modern warfare, sure.

To be fair by Arab standards Hussein was a military genus.

 

[Agent23]

GPS in military mode and with a good missile *might* be good enough for destroying bridges. Still you would prefer something with multiple guidance modes working in cooperation.
Glonass in EWAR conditions? Yeah, sure, waste your smart munitions to do light damage to a bridge with near-misses.
It's not hard to *hit* bridges, the trick is to hit a bridge in a way that will bring it down, rather than cause minor damage that can be fixed in few days.

And you think that the Ukrainians can jam Glonass because?
Oh, yeah, you are a rando on the Iwebz.

I don't know the discussion or its context, ask him not me.

Yeah, sure, the Russians never had the chance to take the bridges out despite having an army surrounding Kiev...

And they did. And the video i've linked earlier shows why the value of that is... limited, has to be weighted against the resources needed for it, and by itself cannot win a war considering historical experiences. The paralyzing being mostly limited to civilians and economy, with minimal effect on military operations.

>demoralize
If you consider Hussein or Assad as geniuses of modern warfare, sure.

Yeah, don't tell that to the allies and their firebombings...

 

[Batrix2070]

Then why was Batrix having a fit about the Russians being on the other bank of some river called the Bug?

This is a general term synonymous with the eastern border because a large part of it is the Bug. (More precisely, after half of the border with Belarus and Ukraine.) So when I said Russians from across the Bug, I meant, across the eastern border. Russians controlling Ukraine stretches Polish defense forces to an even larger area. Which of course translates into even more military spending and even more focus on Russia and repelling the threat, at the expense of other no less important directions.

 

[Agent23]

This is a general term synonymous with the eastern border because a large part of it is the Bug.

And you couldn't explain that coloqualism thet is only understandable to poles?

(More precisely, after half of the border with Belarus and Ukraine.) So when I said Russians from across the Bug, I meant, across the eastern border. Russians controlling Ukraine stretches Polish defense forces to an even larger area. Which of course translates into even more military spending and even more focus on Russia and repelling the threat, at the expense of other no less important directions.

Yeah, OK, because they have an actual reason to attack you...
No natural resources they went, no Russian minorities, not part of the actual Russian heartland ever.
Well, with your support for Ukraine you certainly aren't making them like you more.
And you know what would help with that?
Using your money to improve your strategic deterrence and energy independence.

 

[Batrix2070]

And you couldn't explain that colonialism thet is only understandable to poles?

What?

Yeah, OK, because they have an actual reason to attack you...

Russians are a nation that finds reasons for itself, according to the principle a stick will be found for a dog.

No natural resources they went, no Russian minorities, not part of the actual Russian heartland ever.

As if the Russians ever cared. Nevertheless, there is a good reason for them to take control of Poland, its territory and thus the ease of transferring troops from east to west and vice versa. Also, to shorten the defensive lines to the Oder and Lusatian Neisse and lean on the Carpathians and Sudetenland.

Well, with your support for Ukraine you certainly aren't making them like you more.

As if we should ever care. We Poles know the Russians well and we know that they will only be nice to us if we give them a slap and not seek some kind of agreement. So why shouldn't we do that?

sing your money to improve your strategic deterrence and energy independence.

Great, thank you for this handful of invaluable advice. I didn't know what to do./Sarcasm.
Now on a more serious note, you can spend money on deterrence but you can also spend less of it on kicking the ass of someone you fear the most so that you don't have to spend so much on deterrence. Russia, from across the Bug River, is a constant threat, constantly trying to destabilize in order to weaken the frontline state. Such a sword of Damocles hanging over our heads.

 

[Jormungandr]

And you couldn't explain that colloquialism that is only understandable to Poles?

Yeah, OK, because they have an actual reason to attack you...
No natural resources they went, no Russian minorities, not part of the actual Russian heartland ever.
Well, with your support for Ukraine you certainly aren't making them like you more.
And you know what would help with that?
Using your money to improve your strategic deterrence and energy independence.

Sorry, I had to laugh at that.

One of Russia's aims is to reestablish a geographical defensive line that the Soviet Union and Russian Empires had.

The video has a veil of bias in it, but the underlying information that Russia wants to recreate defensive buffer zones is still apt.

If Ukraine fell, other Eastern European countries would've been next.

The trouble is that Putin and the Russians are still thinking like it's the past.

 

[Marduk]

And you think that the Ukrainians can jam Glonass because?
Oh, yeah, you are a rando on the Iwebz.

Sorry, but faith in RUSSIA STRONK is not a valid substitute for basic technical knowledge and common sense.
We do know that in terms of technical capabilities, GLONASS is not that different from GPS, and in at least some ways is less capable and obviously less invested in. By all chance, it's either equal or less capable, even if the differences are minor.
We also know that even certain third world countries can do GPS jamming since over a decade at least, with varying degrees of success.
Add up these two facts.
Why would you think that Ukraine, with years of potential preparation and likely western assistance, can't possibly do that to GLONASS?

Yeah, sure, the Russians never had the chance to take the bridges out despite having an army surrounding Kiev...

A chance is not good enough, and there isn't (much of) a reward for trying. Look how much trying it took for Americans with a decent bridge. In the end, it took 8 jets with LGBs, obviously getting into range to use them.
So the answer is, it would take Desert Storm level of successful air defense suppression to do it at scale and deep in Ukrainian airspace.

Yeah, don't tell that to the allies and their firebombings...

And my regard for your ability to stay on topic instead of trying to throw in smug pseudomoralistic whataboutism to stick it to the evul west falls even lower...
And for the record, that's one of the data points for establishing what this kind of tactic can achieve with what amount of ordnance and what it can't. So, instead of this bullshit you know that i don't know you don't give a damn about, next time come out with tonnages and sorties if you want to make a worthy argument instead of this obvious trolling.

 

[Free-Stater 101]

I think he doesn't want to stop it.

I think by bringing this up you are all but saying the same by inviting more conflict in this thread, especially when you deliberately quoted the guy the fact that he was smart enough to not take it notwithstanding.

I don't care about this spat at all, in fact I deliberately avoid this thread now just to stay out of it, yet time and time again I am called back and dragged in because of it.

As normally I will give you a one off warning like I did with Agent which is literally stretching all my limits of patience since you deliberately quoted the second warning I gave him in which I deliberately also quoted 'you' to clarify it and make sure both of you damn well understood by meaning, however I am suddenly forced to recognize that somehow you must have misinterpret it's meaning clearly.

Don't quarrel and don't try to start more by getting personal and calling names! You both won't like my next response...

Now I will hear no more of it!

 

[mspence]

I think by bringing this up you are all but saying the same by inviting more conflict in this thread, especially when you deliberately quoted the guy the fact that he was smart enough to not take it notwithstanding.

I don't care about this spat at all, in fact I deliberately avoid this thread now just to stay out of it, yet time and time again I am called back and dragged in because of it.

I normally will give you a one off warning like I did with Agent which is literally stretching all limits of my grace since you deliberately quoted the second warning I gave him in which I deliberately also quoted 'you' to clarify it and make sure both of you damn well understood by meaning, however I am suddenly forced to recognize that somehow you must have misinterpret it clearly.

Don't quarrel and don't try to start more by getting personal and calling names! You both won't like my next response...

Now I will hear no more of it!

Ah, flame wars, the bane of all threads...which is why I personally ignore fightin' and fuedin'.

 

[Agent23]

Sorry, but faith in RUSSIA STRONK is not a valid substitute for basic technical knowledge and common sense.
We do know that in terms of technical capabilities, GLONASS is not that different from GPS, and in at least some ways is less capable and obviously less invested in. By all chance, it's either equal or less capable, even if the differences are minor.
We also know that even certain third world countries can do GPS jamming since over a decade at least, with varying degrees of success.
Add up these two facts.
Why would you think that Ukraine, with years of potential preparation and likely western assistance, can't possibly do that to GLONASS?

Lol, 16 KM, I am sure they can protect every single bridge over the Dnepr.

Congratulations, you have said you have a shovel and ther thus you can dig at Everest until you turn it into a flat field, now go get to work.
Also, there is the elephant on the room, which is that a jammer is a nice, loud and juicy target for antiradiation missiles.

A chance is not good enough, and there isn't (much of) a reward for trying. Look how much trying it took for Americans with a decent bridge. In the end, it took 8 jets with LGBs, obviously getting into range to use them.

Which part of, "they should have done it at the onset od the war, when they were besieging Kiev, didn't you understand?

So the answer is, it would take Desert Storm level of successful air defense suppression to do it at scale and deep in Ukrainian airspace.

Um, do I need to remind you how deep their initial strike was?

They should have committed more forces, them pulled back in a more orderly and destructive manner, as in, take out the Dnieper bridges.

And my regard for your ability to stay on topic instead of trying to throw in smug pseudomoralistic whataboutism to stick it to the evul west falls even lower...

Nope, you were whatsboutising, also, remind me, how much civilian I frasteuxture did the USA/NATO hit in Serbia again?
Sauce for the goose is sauce for the granger or whatever.

And for the record, that's one of the data points for establishing what this kind of tactic can achieve with what amount of ordnance and what it can't. So, instead of this bullshit you know that i don't know you don't give a damn about, next time come out with tonnages and sorties if you want to make a worthy argument instead of this obvious trolling.

Nope, it is you trying to take shit out of context and move the discussion I another direction.

Sorry, but faith in RUSSIA STRONK is not a valid substitute for basic technical knowledge and common sense.
We do know that in terms of technical capabilities, GLONASS is not that different from GPS, and in at least some ways is less capable and obviously less invested in. By all chance, it's either equal or less capable, even if the differences are minor.
We also know that even certain third world countries can do GPS jamming since over a decade at least, with varying degrees of success.
Add up these two facts.
Why would you think that Ukraine, with years of potential preparation and likely western assistance, can't possibly do that to GLONASS?

A chance is not good enough, and there isn't (much of) a reward for trying. Look how much trying it took for Americans with a decent bridge. In the end, it took 8 jets with LGBs, obviously getting into range to use them.
So the answer is, it would take Desert Storm level of successful air defense suppression to do it at scale and deep in Ukrainian airspace.

And my regard for your ability to stay on topic instead of trying to throw in smug pseudomoralistic whataboutism to stick it to the evul west falls even lower...
And for the record, that's one of the data points for establishing what this kind of tactic can achieve with what amount of ordnance and what it can't. So, instead of this bullshit you know that i don't know you don't give a damn about, next time come out with tonnages and sorties if you want to make a worthy argument instead of this obvious trolling.

Yeah, no, this is more of the usual bullshit.

And IMHO a buffer state Ukraine that ends at the Dnieper is plenty of buffer.

 

[Agent23]

Ah, flame wars, the bane of all threads...which is why I personally ignore fightin' and fuedin'

Raging Slav nationalist Immovable object meets Rsging Slav nationalist irresistible force.

 

[Marduk]

Lol, 16 KM, I am sure they can protect every single bridge over the Dnepr.

Congratulations, you have said you have a shovel and ther thus you can dig at Everest until you turn it into a flat field, now go get to work.
Also, there is the elephant on the room, which is that a jammer is a nice, loud and juicy target for antiradiation missiles.



Which part of, "they should have done it at the onset od the war, when they were besieging Kiev, didn't you understand?

Instead of providing the disappointing considering the size of RuAF air support over that front... In anticipation of it failing and hoping they manage to help future, less ambitious efforts in the east, while Ukraine still has loads of S-300's blasting at them?

Um, do I need to remind you how deep their initial strike was?

They should have committed more forces, them pulled back in a more orderly and destructive manner, as in, take out the Dnieper bridges.

That's a bunch of wishful part hindsight based thinking. If they knew they would have pull back, the whole northern offensive was a waste of forces to begin with.

Nope, you were whatsboutising, also, remind me, how much civilian I frasteuxture did the USA/NATO hit in Serbia again?
Sauce for the goose is sauce for the granger or whatever.

Again, i refuse to care, and the more you throw your pseudomoralizing (which again, you don't care about, i don't care about, and you know that i know), the less i will care about it. Go throw this shit at someone who cares.

Nope, it is you trying to take shit out of context and move the discussion I another direction.

The context of your pseudomoralizing? Yeah, fuck that, let's try to keep it in the technical area.

Yeah, no, this is more of the usual bullshit.

And IMHO a buffer state Ukraine that ends at the Dnieper is plenty of buffer.

A buffer state that ends at Tula is plenty of buffer
Sorry, no one cares about Muscovite ambitions and face saving.

 

[Agent23]

Instead of providing the disappointing considering the size of RuAF air support over that front... In anticipation of it failing and hoping they manage to help future, less ambitious efforts in the east, while Ukraine still has loads of S-300's blasting at them?

That's a bunch of wishful part hindsight based thinking. If they knew they would have pull back, the whole northern offensive was a waste of forces to begin with.

Again, i refuse to care, and the more you throw your pseudomoralizing (which again, you don't care about, i don't care about, and you know that i know), the less i will care about it. Go throw this shit at someone who cares.

The context of your pseudomoralizing? Yeah, fuck that, let's try to keep it in the technical area.

Nope, read what I wrote for once and stop ditching the context, lol.

A buffer state that ends at Tula is plenty of buffer
Sorry, no one cares about Muscovite ambitions and face saving.

No one cares for the ambitions of a rando internet nationalist from a country that is 1/5 the population, had infinitely less nukes and lacks much in the way of natural resources, either as compared to Mmmmuskoovvvv...

 

[Marduk]

Nope, read what I wrote for once and stop ditching the context, lol.

No one cares for the ambitions of a rando internet nationalist from a country that is 1/5 the population, had infinitely less nukes and lacks much in the way of natural resources, either as compared to Mmmmuskoovvvv...

Likewise, no one cares about the Moscow simping of some random vatnik kek from a NATO country that is even less populated and weaker than the above.