Der Zeitgeist

Germany throws in 4 additional Leopard 2A6. So we'll have a mixed BTL with 21 Leopard 2A6 (14+4 Germany, 3 Portugal) and 10 Leopard 2A5/Strv 122 from Sweden. 
(in addition to the 2A4 Battalion from Poland & others)
 

The Russian embassy in Berlin now has a Russian T-72B in front of it, destroyed during the Battle of Kyiv. It will stay there till monday.
 

The Russian embassy in Berlin now has a Russian T-72B in front of it, destroyed during the Battle of Kyiv. It will stay there till monday.
 

The Russian embassy in Berlin now has a Russian T-72B in front of it, destroyed during the Battle of Kyiv. It will stay there till monday.
 

The Russian embassy in Berlin now has a Russian T-72B in front of it, destroyed during the Battle of Kyiv. It will stay there till monday.
 

The Russian embassy in Berlin now has a Russian T-72B in front of it, destroyed during the Battle of Kyiv. It will stay there till monday.
 

I see his framing like this:
Stablizing Russia's economy and society as a nation in perpetual war and finding a new normalcy in its self-inflicted autarky. In a way, it's a similar approach to the "Juche"-Ideology of North Korea.
Overall, still playing for time and hoping that the West gives up first.

I see his framing like this:
Stablizing Russia's economy and society as a nation in perpetual war and finding a new normalcy in its self-inflicted autarky. In a way, it's a similar approach to the "Juche"-Ideology of North Korea.
Overall, still playing for time and hoping that the West gives up first.

I see his framing like this:
Stablizing Russia's economy and society as a nation in perpetual war and finding a new normalcy in its self-inflicted autarky. In a way, it's a similar approach to the "Juche"-Ideology of North Korea.
Overall, still playing for time and hoping that the West gives up first.

I see his framing like this:
Stablizing Russia's economy and society as a nation in perpetual war and finding a new normalcy in its self-inflicted autarky. In a way, it's a similar approach to the "Juche"-Ideology of North Korea.
Overall, still playing for time and hoping that the West gives up first.

@chuckdyke seriously your behaviour is wild. Accusing others of holding putin sentiments for stating what is well regarded as historical orthodoxy in regards to the russian will to keep on fighting despite horrendous losses i think actually should garner some warning from the admins here.
You are poisoning the well imo and should probably take some time to chill out before posting again.

Nah, keep dreaming.
They never even answered in the thread about this bug in more than three years.
 

Nah, keep dreaming.
They never even answered in the thread about this bug in more than three years.
 

It's quite likely they simply have no idea how too shoot down something like that. The Canadians tried in 1998 on a much smaller balloon and failed:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2023/02/03/busting-that-chinese-balloon-is-harder-than-you-think/
You might still think that simply puncturing the balloon envelope would be enough. It might not pop like a toy balloon, but letting the gas out should be enough to bring the balloon down.
The problem though is one of scale. Stratospheric balloons are colossal. NASA’s standard balloons are 40 million cubic feet, a volume equivalent to more than 195 GoodyearGT -1.6% blimps: you could fit en entire football stadium inside one. The balloon envelope is made of plastic material no thicker than sandwich wrap, and the pressure difference between the inside and outside is small. Attempting to let the air out by punching a few holes is like expecting to ventilate an entire warehouse with fresh air by opening one small window.
We know that large balloons are hard to shoot down from previous experience. In 1998 a rogue Canadian weather balloon drifted towards Russian airspace. Fighter jets from Canada, Norway and Sweden attempted to bring it down without success. Two Canadian air force CF-18 fighters hit the balloon with more than 1,000 rounds of 20mm cannon fire off the coast of Newfoundland, riddling it with holes. This was not enough to let a significant amount of gas out, and the balloon continued drifting.
A volley of 2.75” rockets was equally ineffective, as the high-explosive rockets simply flew though the balloon without detonating. This may be the Air Force’s real concern with intercepting the Chinese balloon: any missile fired at it may be a much greater hazard to civilians below than the balloon itself, which is likely to descend slowly if at all. (The Canadian balloon drifted into Russian territory and is believed to have come down in the Arctic Sea).

It's quite likely they simply have no idea how too shoot down something like that. The Canadians tried in 1998 on a much smaller balloon and failed:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2023/02/03/busting-that-chinese-balloon-is-harder-than-you-think/
You might still think that simply puncturing the balloon envelope would be enough. It might not pop like a toy balloon, but letting the gas out should be enough to bring the balloon down.
The problem though is one of scale. Stratospheric balloons are colossal. NASA’s standard balloons are 40 million cubic feet, a volume equivalent to more than 195 GoodyearGT -1.6% blimps: you could fit en entire football stadium inside one. The balloon envelope is made of plastic material no thicker than sandwich wrap, and the pressure difference between the inside and outside is small. Attempting to let the air out by punching a few holes is like expecting to ventilate an entire warehouse with fresh air by opening one small window.
We know that large balloons are hard to shoot down from previous experience. In 1998 a rogue Canadian weather balloon drifted towards Russian airspace. Fighter jets from Canada, Norway and Sweden attempted to bring it down without success. Two Canadian air force CF-18 fighters hit the balloon with more than 1,000 rounds of 20mm cannon fire off the coast of Newfoundland, riddling it with holes. This was not enough to let a significant amount of gas out, and the balloon continued drifting.
A volley of 2.75” rockets was equally ineffective, as the high-explosive rockets simply flew though the balloon without detonating. This may be the Air Force’s real concern with intercepting the Chinese balloon: any missile fired at it may be a much greater hazard to civilians below than the balloon itself, which is likely to descend slowly if at all. (The Canadian balloon drifted into Russian territory and is believed to have come down in the Arctic Sea).

It's quite likely they simply have no idea how too shoot down something like that. The Canadians tried in 1998 on a much smaller balloon and failed:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2023/02/03/busting-that-chinese-balloon-is-harder-than-you-think/
You might still think that simply puncturing the balloon envelope would be enough. It might not pop like a toy balloon, but letting the gas out should be enough to bring the balloon down.
The problem though is one of scale. Stratospheric balloons are colossal. NASA’s standard balloons are 40 million cubic feet, a volume equivalent to more than 195 GoodyearGT -1.6% blimps: you could fit en entire football stadium inside one. The balloon envelope is made of plastic material no thicker than sandwich wrap, and the pressure difference between the inside and outside is small. Attempting to let the air out by punching a few holes is like expecting to ventilate an entire warehouse with fresh air by opening one small window.
We know that large balloons are hard to shoot down from previous experience. In 1998 a rogue Canadian weather balloon drifted towards Russian airspace. Fighter jets from Canada, Norway and Sweden attempted to bring it down without success. Two Canadian air force CF-18 fighters hit the balloon with more than 1,000 rounds of 20mm cannon fire off the coast of Newfoundland, riddling it with holes. This was not enough to let a significant amount of gas out, and the balloon continued drifting.
A volley of 2.75” rockets was equally ineffective, as the high-explosive rockets simply flew though the balloon without detonating. This may be the Air Force’s real concern with intercepting the Chinese balloon: any missile fired at it may be a much greater hazard to civilians below than the balloon itself, which is likely to descend slowly if at all. (The Canadian balloon drifted into Russian territory and is believed to have come down in the Arctic Sea).

It's quite likely they simply have no idea how too shoot down something like that. The Canadians tried in 1998 on a much smaller balloon and failed:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2023/02/03/busting-that-chinese-balloon-is-harder-than-you-think/
You might still think that simply puncturing the balloon envelope would be enough. It might not pop like a toy balloon, but letting the gas out should be enough to bring the balloon down.
The problem though is one of scale. Stratospheric balloons are colossal. NASA’s standard balloons are 40 million cubic feet, a volume equivalent to more than 195 GoodyearGT -1.6% blimps: you could fit en entire football stadium inside one. The balloon envelope is made of plastic material no thicker than sandwich wrap, and the pressure difference between the inside and outside is small. Attempting to let the air out by punching a few holes is like expecting to ventilate an entire warehouse with fresh air by opening one small window.
We know that large balloons are hard to shoot down from previous experience. In 1998 a rogue Canadian weather balloon drifted towards Russian airspace. Fighter jets from Canada, Norway and Sweden attempted to bring it down without success. Two Canadian air force CF-18 fighters hit the balloon with more than 1,000 rounds of 20mm cannon fire off the coast of Newfoundland, riddling it with holes. This was not enough to let a significant amount of gas out, and the balloon continued drifting.
A volley of 2.75” rockets was equally ineffective, as the high-explosive rockets simply flew though the balloon without detonating. This may be the Air Force’s real concern with intercepting the Chinese balloon: any missile fired at it may be a much greater hazard to civilians below than the balloon itself, which is likely to descend slowly if at all. (The Canadian balloon drifted into Russian territory and is believed to have come down in the Arctic Sea).

It's quite likely they simply have no idea how too shoot down something like that. The Canadians tried in 1998 on a much smaller balloon and failed:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2023/02/03/busting-that-chinese-balloon-is-harder-than-you-think/
You might still think that simply puncturing the balloon envelope would be enough. It might not pop like a toy balloon, but letting the gas out should be enough to bring the balloon down.
The problem though is one of scale. Stratospheric balloons are colossal. NASA’s standard balloons are 40 million cubic feet, a volume equivalent to more than 195 GoodyearGT -1.6% blimps: you could fit en entire football stadium inside one. The balloon envelope is made of plastic material no thicker than sandwich wrap, and the pressure difference between the inside and outside is small. Attempting to let the air out by punching a few holes is like expecting to ventilate an entire warehouse with fresh air by opening one small window.
We know that large balloons are hard to shoot down from previous experience. In 1998 a rogue Canadian weather balloon drifted towards Russian airspace. Fighter jets from Canada, Norway and Sweden attempted to bring it down without success. Two Canadian air force CF-18 fighters hit the balloon with more than 1,000 rounds of 20mm cannon fire off the coast of Newfoundland, riddling it with holes. This was not enough to let a significant amount of gas out, and the balloon continued drifting.
A volley of 2.75” rockets was equally ineffective, as the high-explosive rockets simply flew though the balloon without detonating. This may be the Air Force’s real concern with intercepting the Chinese balloon: any missile fired at it may be a much greater hazard to civilians below than the balloon itself, which is likely to descend slowly if at all. (The Canadian balloon drifted into Russian territory and is believed to have come down in the Arctic Sea).

Can they stop it with the Wehrmacht markings?  You can still fight the Russians.

It's quite likely they simply have no idea how too shoot down something like that. The Canadians tried in 1998 on a much smaller balloon and failed:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2023/02/03/busting-that-chinese-balloon-is-harder-than-you-think/
You might still think that simply puncturing the balloon envelope would be enough. It might not pop like a toy balloon, but letting the gas out should be enough to bring the balloon down.
The problem though is one of scale. Stratospheric balloons are colossal. NASA’s standard balloons are 40 million cubic feet, a volume equivalent to more than 195 GoodyearGT -1.6% blimps: you could fit en entire football stadium inside one. The balloon envelope is made of plastic material no thicker than sandwich wrap, and the pressure difference between the inside and outside is small. Attempting to let the air out by punching a few holes is like expecting to ventilate an entire warehouse with fresh air by opening one small window.
We know that large balloons are hard to shoot down from previous experience. In 1998 a rogue Canadian weather balloon drifted towards Russian airspace. Fighter jets from Canada, Norway and Sweden attempted to bring it down without success. Two Canadian air force CF-18 fighters hit the balloon with more than 1,000 rounds of 20mm cannon fire off the coast of Newfoundland, riddling it with holes. This was not enough to let a significant amount of gas out, and the balloon continued drifting.
A volley of 2.75” rockets was equally ineffective, as the high-explosive rockets simply flew though the balloon without detonating. This may be the Air Force’s real concern with intercepting the Chinese balloon: any missile fired at it may be a much greater hazard to civilians below than the balloon itself, which is likely to descend slowly if at all. (The Canadian balloon drifted into Russian territory and is believed to have come down in the Arctic Sea).

It also shows how overpowered CM direct fire control is, in a PBEM, you would just tell the tank to shoot right on the foxholes even if he cant see, because you can through the spotting drone.
Irl it seems he couldnt even get a warning to the tank for >2minutes, let alone direct its fire.

Something to note, we don't want oil prices to rise, removing Russian supply of oil can lead it to oil prices rising. While we want to limit money flowing to Russia, its counterproductive for Western economies relying on cheap energy to stop the flow. It also has knock on effects on the world economy. Recall the fear of shortages from grain from Ukraine and Russia causing prices to rise? 

What changed is that the endorphin ran out.

I have been in the US over there you don't discuss politics, religion, or guns. The only thing out of three we can talk about is guns. Everything else is too sensitive. 

You guys over there seriously need to grow up. We have discussed politics in a number of countries in a very non-neutral way - so far (mostly) without being at each other's throats. From the USA, one of the oldest modern democracies, we shouldn't expect less. 😉