Jump to content

Lethaface

Members
  • Posts

    4,026
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Lethaface last won the day on December 29 2021

Lethaface had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    Netherlands
  • Interests
    History, geopolitics, the science/art of war, critical thinking, good food, music and life in general.

Converted

  • Location
    Netherlands
  • Occupation
    IT

Recent Profile Visitors

3,183 profile views

Lethaface's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (3/3)

1.2k

Reputation

  1. Spotting can definitely be finnicky at times, but overall I'm glad there's no guaranteed spots. It would probably improve some situations but undo much of what makes CM spotting great (compared to other games). I deal with it knowing that the enemy has to deal with it as well.
  2. While the naval successes where/are impressive and had tangible strategic affects (grain corridor for one), those were imo not directly influencing the military operational reality. For that Ukraine would have to sink at least as much ships as they have done until now. Russia can (afaik) still launch cruise missiles and ferry supplies, just less then before. The recent successes against the RU Air force are, however, going to have direct impact on the operational reality / military equilibrium if Ukraine can sustain these numbers. Because Russia, like others said, can't sustain these losses. And to my eyes at least it looks like these are not incidents anymore. Russia can't lose another couple of A-50s in a couple of weeks. Also, seriously degrading Russia's airborne early warning capability over Ukraine could have many implications, making life for Russian planes even harder then it already is. One can imagine planes dropping glidebombs getting ambushed by Ukr fighters, etc. So, strategically the recent 'air show' is imo the most promising development with potential large strategic implications we have seen since, quite a while? Now add a few dozen f-16s in the mix and things might get even more interesting. Bye glidebombs, hi JDAMs. What might Ukraine be able to enable using those? I expect/guess/hope more then Ru can do with meat attacks supported by glidebomb artillery. Anyway it's a bit too early to start a chant yet, but it's sure is looking promising imo!
  3. Didn't they already do it, light? Kherson already has operational implications, as glide bombs and forces (etc) Russia deploys to that area can't be deployed somewhere else. Imo it's already a good opportunity for attriting Russia's capabilities in a favorable way. Sure the scale might not be same as other fronts, but every little bit helps. The risks are also not that high for Ukraine, sometimes one has to make a play with pawns / some pieces in one place, in order to force the opponent to react to it and enable other pieces/operations to come into play. And indeed who knows what kind of options might come forth from it, surely Russia can't neglect it unless they want to test whether unopposed light might create an instance of deep infiltration and exploitation in the rear; this time without the traditional heavy mass breakthrough preceding it. Not putting pressure on Kherson front would certainly be favorable for Russia, imo.
  4. Lol why is Germany always such a strange topic on here. Scholz says that Germany doesn't want to get directly involved in the war, he didn't say that he fears direct retaliation by Russia as a reason for not getting directly involved. He just said that they don't want to get directly involved as a policy. Now whether one agrees with the policy, or whether one does agree assisting Ukrainians with Taurus is actually being directly involved in the war isn't a relevant subject for speculation about Germanies involvement in article 5. Article 5 is in a whole other ballpark universe. Now one can also speculate about article 5, but going there based of the supposed background reason for a policy not wanting to get directly involved in the war (given that one believes sending Tauris would be doing so), is rather farfetched to say it diplomatically. It is an attribution error based of speculative judgments, about what the reason might be for a certain policy and whether that policy might come from a tendency inside Germany to not uphold to their treaties. They certainly DON'T have treaty which obliges them to send cruise missiles to Ukraine and assist Ukraine with firing them, neither does UK and FRA seeming to do so has any relevancy to Germanies interpretation of stuff and their sovereignty position (also neglecting any potential technical differences between Taurus / Stormshadow which might have impact; do I think that is the case? no but I don't have information to confirm/deny that premise). Now to keep things much more simple, which I prefer and usually is good practice: it could just be that Germany / Scholz is less 'flexible' when it comes to interpreting whether assisting Ukraine firing Taurus is being 'directly involved in the war'. UK and France might just 'bend the rules' in their mind and establish the position they are 'not' directly involved in the war even if they assist Ukraine firing their missiles, while Germany might feel it is if doing the same thing. UK/Fra might reason that there is little difference between supporting Ukraine to use weapon system A or B, while Germany might reason there is a big difference. In fact such differences are not surprising at all, if one has some experience within EU/countries in question.
  5. I guess those backslashes are escaping the spaces? I'm not knowledgeable about Mac script syntax but at first I was thinking those alternating slashes can't be intentional; but then it seems they preclude every space so guess it is. good luck!
  6. Heavy metal sounds like it indeed! Good! I guess there are still more minds of similar 'desire'. And although I always enjoyed the beta AARs I won't mind unspoiling these myself
  7. Another one here. Also I'd say a good number of assets could be reused.
  8. Nice surprise, looking forward to this! Some beta AAR with Pershings and Comets mingling with Panthers or other big cats would be noice
  9. Fwiw Morocco protected it's Jews during WW2 and there's still much goodwill between a large part of both populations.
  10. Fwiw watch (part) of the interview I posted earlier. I think it's a good one for opening perspective.
  11. Don't know that book but yes 'terrorist' tactics were common on all sides at that time.
  12. I haven't yet but I guess don't bother, as you are clearly not interested in other perspectives than those you uphold as absolute truths as far as I'm concerned. PS if you are it's better for PM I'd guess.
  13. Yeah I've never put someone on my ignore list but for self protection I might do soon for him.
  14. Fwiw you are pushing propaganda as the absolute truth. Even Jewish acquainces who fought with the Haganah (and weren't welcome in Britain until very recently for that reason), which I have spoken to in person, don't support your version of the facts. Ciao
×
×
  • Create New...