Russian Invasion of Ukraine (2022): Thread 1 - Ukrainian Liars vs Russian Liars with Air and Artillery Superiority

How well is the combat this going for Russia?

  • ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ Blyatskrieg

    Votes: 46 6.6%
  • ⭐⭐⭐⭐ A well planned strike with few faults

    Votes: 45 6.5%
  • ⭐⭐⭐ Competent attack with some upsets

    Votes: 292 42.1%
  • ⭐⭐ Worse than expected

    Votes: 269 38.8%
  • ⭐ Ukraine takes back Crimea 2022

    Votes: 42 6.1%

  • Total voters
    694
Status
Not open for further replies.
VTOL capabilities would be extremely useful in a scenario in which enemy has capacity to destroy most of your airfields. Since Russians seems to be using mostly ancient equipment, it would would dominate in proper hands.
I actually have some experience with this matter - although not from the plane end of things. The US Airforce wants smaller runways, which VTOL allows for. All well and good.
But the problem is that the F-35 is the definition of high maintenance and are basically irreplaceable. It suffers from the same problem as the late war German tanks. Innovative and probably will be amazing in the next iteration, but for now it's a plane that's only capable on paper and will melt in a near-peer conflict.

I also don't buy the "well you see, we're so stealthed and so long ranged, the enemy will simply never hit us!" mindset. You should always expect casualties. Thinking you're invulnerable because "Hoorah, high speed low drag" is just arrogance.
 
Okay but, where will they land? All the airports across the whole country are bombed, all the runways are shot to shit, and there's a huge no fly zone across the whole country.

Good luck, I guess.
I like how no one mentions that, and if a third country offers its air bases as a staging area then they become a legit target as well. So there is no Ukrainian air force to speak of, in reality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the fall of man
It's strange that not a single F-35 is ever delivered.
You would almost think they are too good to be true.
Nah it makes perfect sense not to send them. If we gave them anything other than old soviet designs they'd have to spend at least a month training pilots on them, plus they'd have to buy all new munitions. Easy to do in peacetime, but not wartime.
 
I didn’t need to see the video of pit full of pigs being burned alive.
I didn’t need to see a family and their dogs being shot to pieces on their car.
I didn’t need to see Azov Battalion Nazis crucify a man.
But I did anyway.
2022 is really showing off what we all deserve and have coming to us if we don’t unfuck the situation PDQ.
Wasn’t the crucified man a pedo tho? There are so many versions about that damn video that idk what to believe anymore.
Which is somewhat valid for everything happening. The number of debunked videos is high and is getting higher.
 
Earlier today a Ukrainian babushka in Kharkiv got her foot blown clean off in an MLRS strike.

I think that she got hit by a large piece of shrapnel. Those can tear off limbs.

Can anyone identify the projectile?

Not a good idea to use artillery on people that look just like your own citizens. This is also another example of why democrat antigun faggot arguments of the military having more equipment than your guns can fight being retarded. This is a better propaganda victory than any faggot reddit or tiktok meme for the Ukrainians.
 
The Russian hate for Nazis is super real and kinda weird for anyone whose country wasn't brutalized I imagine. A buddy of mine talked about how you'd find remains in all the old battlefields occasionally. If they thought they were German for whatever reason they'd abuse the remains out of spite.

that's because neither Russian nor Soviet school teach about Soviet Union-Nazi alliance, so they still believe that war started in 1941, not in 1939 like for the rest of humanity.

As to dead burial, Soviets used tractors to grade killing fields with dead bodies several layers deep. So much respect for their dead.

In the low and swamp lands in West Russia there are still shitton of bodies that no one cares to exhume and give proper soldier's burial. No expense spared on patriotic parades though.

Google Russia-black diggers ... people who dig up war trophies. Some do it for profit, some are volunteers, but none are supported by the state.

Another Slav scam going that was popular, find dead German soldier's name from archives (who was never found) figure out any living relatives and offer bones repatriation for a nice fee in hard currency.
 
that's because neither Russian nor Soviet school teach about Soviet Union-Nazi alliance, so they still believe that war started in 1941, not in 1939 like for the rest of humanity.

As to dead burial, Soviets used tractors to grade killing fields with dead bodies several layers deep. So much respect for their dead.

In the low and swamp lands in West Russia there are still shitton of bodies that no one cares to exhume and give proper soldier's burial. No expense spared on patriotic parades though.

Google Russia-black diggers ... people who dig up war trophies. Some do it for profit, some are volunteers, but none are supported by the state.

Another Slav scam going that was popular, find dead German soldier's name from archives (who was never found) figure out any living relatives and offer bones repatriation for a nice fee in hard currency.
I believe he was a black digger, reading between the lines. But that was a can of worms I didn't plan on opening.
 
How exactly would deploying any type nuke in Ukraine fuck up the concept of mutually assured destruction in the 21st century ?

I hear this paranoid Russian propaganda being parroted constantly but no one ever bothers attempting to explain how this would change the prevailing nuclear strategy. This isn't 1962 and neither the US or Russia's ability to counterattack is threatened by any kind of decapitation strike so I fail to see what we would gain other than the contempt of the entire world for doing it.

1: We both have domestic ICBM sites spread out over enormous areas capable of hitting each others territory which would necessitate the near total destruction of the target nation to reduce the number of warheads to a point that ABM defenses could even begin to have a chance at making a difference. And Russia's missile forces have a much wider field of range categories and are often mobile, further increasing their survivability.

2: We both have SSBN's capable of hitting anywhere on earth from comparable ranges to any land based ICBM.

3: Albeit much smaller than ours, Russia does have strategic bombers capable of getting within cruise missile range of our territory and vastly more nuclear capable multi-role aircraft which can preform the same role in conjunction with tanker aircraft.

4: We likely both have, either publicly acknowledged or secretly, other means of delivering nukes via SSBN's that remain submerged and bypass any missile defense.

The only notable disparity is our lack of ground based cruise missiles, they maintained this capability after the INF treaty was signed by toeing the line of permitted ranges allowed (and it's speculated well above those limits) while we fully committed and scraped all of ours. They were warned time and time again we would withdraw if they didn't make more of an effort and only under Trump did we finally pull the plug, well after this NATO/Ukraine obsession heated up. We've only just started experimenting with reintroducing conventionally armed land based tomahawks and there's so far been no plans to bring them to Europe, even though there's nothing stopping us from deploying both conventional and nuclear ones all over NATO alongside our current aircraft delivered nukes if we wanted to.

And how would nuclear tomahawks in Ukraine be anymore threatening than the hundreds we could deploy via subs alone if they genuinely believe we would attempt a nuclear first strike ? It still would be remotely capable of preventing a counter attack even from sites in Russia itself even in concert with a full scale attack via all other means, but everything of any importance in western Russia is well withing tomahawk range of the White, Black and Baltic seas.

And despite what Russia might claim, there's no AA system that can realistically defend against low flying cruise missiles no matter how much lead time they have to react. If we used just 100 and attacked targets near very end of their maximum range having to fly over Russia the entire distance they would only get lucky and shoot down maybe single digits that fly over SHORAD units who happen to be in the right place, we've seen how effective Russian AA is against tomahawks and even turboprop driven drones in the middle east.

Doesn't Russia have it's own automated second strike capability, Deadhand? As to nuclear weapons what are we talking about?

Are you referring to our nuclear tipped cruise missiles that can only be launched from aircraft?f If a nuclear sword of Damocles was the intent of the US we would put them on a B2 and launch them from Poland.

Such, we already have a way to take Russia out of we wanted but would still suffer a second strike. Are you going to sperg that cruise missiles are difficult to detect for Russian air defense?

That might be true but it's even harder to detect when launched from a B2 and it eliminates most human intelligence.

On the matter of bioweapons labs, what is the point? We couldn't even control COVID and now you think we are going to use biological warfare?

What are the objectives of that? Why would we need to make it in the Ukraine? Trust me, their are better ways to create bioweapons than in a country full of Slavic Niggers.

None of the theories regarding this grave concern to Russia makes sense. I get that Russia does not like us on their doorstep but all this fear of WMDs doesn't stand up to basic questioning.

As has been stated earlier, the US doesn't have the intermediate range missiles that would be capable of such strikes anymore. And to add to that, it is the official US nuclear policy to be second strike only - no preemptive nuclear strikes. And that's not the result of "US good guy" propaganda, that's the US thinking "wait, I can't jew people if Wall Street is a pile of ashes and all the bank records are EMP'd."
So the Russian claims of nuclear paranoia are pretty hollow - especially when the Americans are building anti-IBCM missile systems and the Russians are building hypersonic missiles to counter those systems. You'd think in a world of dindu nuffins the Russians would just be making anti-IBCM systems of their own, but nope. Gotta go on the offensive, never the defensive.

In fact, before the invasion the Russians were butthurt about the US selling the Ukrainians AA equipment. "How dare you sell weapons that cannot be used to directly attack others!"
All you guys are saying basically amounts to "Well Russia has all of these other threats so why would it matter if America put even more threats on their doorstep?" To pretend like Russia is being paranoid and any other country would be okay with this situation is delusional.
 
Ukrainechads... We got too cocky...
FMtyDjmXEAYSIJb.jpg

Taken straight from the new EU sanctions on Russia documents. Obviously a mistake but still funny as shit.
 
I get that Pan-Slavism is just Russian hegemony spelled differently but Bulgaria refused to declare war on Russia during the last big one because they have helped them shake off the Ottoman yoke after five centuries in the 19th century and the 1st Bulgarian Army fought with the Red Army all the way to Klagenfurt, from 1944 to 1945 after the Red Army "accidentally" forgot to stop at the Romanian-Bulgarian border. They have plenty of present day ties as well, see below. Seeing this is rather strange. Is every former Warsaw Pact country in the EU trying to clear house to beg the bastards in Bruxelles for some modern equipment and money for its military budget (money that will cease to be public funds a second after it has been transferred) after the dust has settled?

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back