Zeleban
-
Posts
1,260 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
14
Posts posted by Zeleban
-
-
6 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Could be a language barrier, but no... reluctance and fear are not interchangeable. I am reluctant to get off the couch right now and get some food. Not because I fear food or getting up or the walk into the kitchen. I just don't feel like it because I'm comfortable.
OK
Exactly the same "uncomfortable" may arise after Russia attacks other countries. This is why more and more countries are no longer believing in the United States. It is precisely because of this “uncomfortable”
-
3 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Fear is not the same as reluctance.
Actually, the “reluctance” you described above is a consequence of fear. Exactly the same reluctance may arise after Russia attacks other countries. This is why more and more countries are no longer believing in the United States. It is precisely because of this “reluctance”
-
36 minutes ago, chrisl said:
Because their sustainable military budget is maybe 1.5x the budget of the University of California. Not the state of California, just the larger of the three state university systems.
The Russian navy isn't doing particularly well against a country that has no navy.
The Russian army is stalled out with what it's currently holding against, as has been repeatedly pointed out, a country that was expected to last a week at most. It's closing on 2 years, and they've pissed away the better part of 50 years of soviet production.
Russia has no tech industry and depends on China for any tech. Russia is a tiny customer to China compared to the west.
The main thing that keeps Russia on the world stage is the leftover nukes from the USSR. I don't think anybody really expects that Russia would use them unless directly attacked by an overwhelming force, but if Russia collapses in a chaotic way those nukes could get scattered to a lot of places that we would be a lot less happy to have them.
Russia needs to lose badly in Ukraine, but not collapse internally to the extent that nuclear materials get scattered around willy nilly. The west needs to support Ukraine in winning for the same non-proliferation reasons that they want to avoid Russian collapse: we promised protection in return for giving up the legacy nukes. Ukraine gained independence as the 3rd largest possessor of nuclear weapons on the planet and gave them up voluntarily. If you still had them, none of this would be happening now, and every little state with nuclear aspirations is watching closely. If we abandon you there will be a mad rush of nuclear proliferation among much less stable countries.
Your post raises even more questions than before. If everything is exactly as you described, then why is the West afraid of Russia? Why do more and more allies of the West not trust it and believe that it is better to rely on their own strengths than on the support of the West?
-
Just now, Battlefront.com said:
You really do need to take a break from this because you're swimming in a pool of unreality that isn't healthy either for you and certainly not for this thread.
This is a very real development of events in the event of the fall of Ukraine
-
4 minutes ago, sburke said:
So all these UA soldiers armed by Russia are just gonna say, well okay you want us to attack Estonia? Hundreds of thousands of them? Sure
Yes, this is exactly what thousands of Chechen fighters did after the defeat from Russia, despite all the atrocities that Russia committed on the territory of Chechnya. Putin will have many ways to do this. However, one of the most important is money. If you cannot feed your family in a dilapidated and plundered country, then you will gladly go to war even to the ends of the earth against anyone. This is exactly what thousands of Russian volunteers do today when they join the Russian army.
-
3 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
The Russia military is broken as far as great power projection and will remain so for some time to come. Right now it cannot gain ground against a minor regional power who was not supposed to last 2 weeks let alone 2 years.
This is not true, at the moment Russia is keeping most of the world in fear. How can Russia be called a secondary state after this?
-
14 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
Russia will need a decade at least to rebuild what it had on 01 Jan 22, assuming it can even do it under enduring sanctions. So you are pushing disinformation about Russian superiority, western inferiority and Ukrainian impending defeat...with friends like these....
In the event of the fall of Ukraine, Russia will have hundreds of thousands of well-trained and combat-experienced fighters - former soldiers of the Ukrainian army.
15 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:No, thanks, we have bad experiences here in the past of charging alone in helpless wars
It’s not true, you then had loyal allies in France and Great Britain
-
1 minute ago, Bearstronaut said:
There's a pretty big difference between a combined arms assault into Estonia and an errant missile crossing into Polish airspace my dude.
Yes, but there are also common features in these events - the lack of clear and decisive actions to ensure the security of one’s borders, both air and ground
-
7 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
The RA can barely string together a platoon attack let alone Div level assaults at this point.
Only against an enemy ready for defense (including morally) and entrenched.
7 minutes ago, The_Capt said:To answer your question above - based on how we saw invasion of Ukraine go down, those Russian columns will likely be stopped cold by local forces while NATO sorts itself out
Let me remind you that the depth of penetration of mechanized columns deep into Ukraine at the beginning of the war amounted to tens of kilometers per day (in areas not ready for defense).
7 minutes ago, The_Capt said:The immediate response would be NATO airpower
But what about working in a team, negotiations among alliance members, etc.?
And by the way, no one is saying that Russia needs to fight a war on two fronts. This can be implemented immediately after the defeat of Ukraine
-
11 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:
Or better- read how actual defensive layers work. There was no battery in sight, out AA are in shambles till circa 2035, and even then they will be used only to defend core areas, not stripes of woods along border.
As I understand it, the subsequent hasty bringing of Poland’s air defense to full combat readiness is the implementation of the work of “actual defensive layers”
-
2 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:
The same is about Estonia, Lithuania, Finland, Romania, you name it.
How long will it take Russian mechanized columns to cross the territory of Estonia? How long will it take for NATO “team players” to consult in the event of Russian aggression?
4 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:Bro, take some medicines or something.
I feel great, by the way I'm not your brother
-
14 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:
I doubt they made special avenue, it's just hypothesis. Most probably it was testing NATO reactions.
And NATO's reaction is... ?
I hope you understand that with these actions Russia is testing NATO's resolve. This will be important for deciding on aggression against some NATO countries. Nobody seems to have noticed the recent crash of the Shahed drone on Romanian territory, and now we have a violation of Polish airspace. I wonder why Polish air defense didn’t shoot down this missile? Perhaps they were afraid of offending Russia by shooting down one of its missiles
-
6 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:
Romanians have it much more often. And it didn't landed this time.
Great, now we have a new route for Russian missile attacks on Ukraine - from Polish territory. As I understand it, there will be no serious reaction to this incident from Poland.
-
-
-
-
1 hour ago, Haiduk said:
Damn, I've slept so soundly, that didn't hear anything. About 30 aerial targets were shot down over Kyiv and suburbs.
The same. I only found out about the attack in the morning when I woke up as usual
-
1 hour ago, Zeleban said:
Tonight was the most massive missile attack on Ukraine in recent times. However, it is still weaker than last year’s attacks, when the number of missiles reached 100
here is the updated information
-
In general, in my opinion, missile attacks on Ukrainian cities today play a negative role for the Russians. Russia today is conducting one of the most successful information and psychological campaigns against the Ukrainian state. The Kremlin has successfully undermined Ukrainians' faith in its leadership and is quite successful in countering the mobilization of Ukrainians, pitting them against military officials.
However, massive attacks on rear cities reduce the effectiveness of these informational and psychological actions, returning Ukrainians to reality and indicating who their true enemy is.
-
Tonight was the most massive missile attack on Ukraine in recent times. However, it is still weaker than last year’s attacks, when the number of missiles reached 100
-
Hey, it turns out there are sober-minded officials in the West
-
Ukrainian soldiers began to receive Tsukorok (sugar) drone detectors. This detector scans the radio air and, based on the characteristic frequency at which a certain type of drone is controlled, determines that there is a drone nearby and you need to hide.
Allegedly, this device is inexpensive, and its effectiveness has already been tested by soldiers on the front line.
-
53 minutes ago, Kraft said:
Morale is definitively at the lowest it has ever been, with failing western support and a clearly in it to win it russia, that will not coup and surrender or revolt as everyone here keeps dreaming about.
It would be funny if next year we saw a change in the rhetoric of Western politics from “Ukraine must not lose” to “Russia must win.”
At least in this case, many people in the West would finally sleep peacefully: Russia's nuclear weapons remained in the possession of Russia itself
.
But seriously, why are some people in the West not afraid that nuclear weapons are in the possession of a state that has repeatedly threatened to wipe out Western civilization, but instead are very afraid of the mythical "Warlord of Novosibirks"?
-
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Russia has never stated that it was going to attack the United States. However, she constantly claims that she is ready to attack Europe
On the contrary, recently we have seen significant “uncomfortability” for the United States in supporting Ukraine.
The conflict between the US and Russia could easily turn nuclear. Therefore, the United States will not go to war with Russia, even if it attacks Europe