Ukrainian Defensive War against the Russian Invasion - Mark IV: The Partitioning of Discussion

[Techpriest Mk II]

In Crimera, there is a manhunt for two ladies who have poisoned and killed 46 Russian soldiers.
snippet:

https://www.businessinsider.com/2-women-who-poisoned-46-russian-troops-in-shoot-out-with-fsb-report-2024-1?r=US&IR=T

https://ghostarchive.org/archive/SrNol

It makes me wonder how big the partisan moment is in Ukraine? We don't hear a lot about.

The Russians are deploying Rosvgardia units in the occupied area. Ukrainian partisans are a problem still two years into the conflict.

 

[teriyakiburns]

Reformer cucks and Vatniggers got BTFO'd today as an M2 Bradley defeats a T-90M in a tank duel using the chain cannon, despite not being a fucking tank.

Pentagon Wars stans BTFO?

 

[AgendaPoster]

And how will they be able to launch these Tomahawks without a navy that isn't just riverboats?

You would LITERALLY spend your time trying to find endless reasons to NOT give Ukraine what it needs, instead of arguing for the opposite.
You're in the Ukraine thread. You should want Ukraine to be given whatever it needs to push back against Russia.
Anyway:

Also, give Ukraine ships.

 

[Fuck It We'll Do It Live]

Also, give Ukraine ships.

Frigate/destroyers-sized ships that could easily meet the same fate as the Moskva via anti-ship missiles. And not even Russia's submarines have been safe from Ukrainian Storm Shadows.

The advantage of the current cruise missiles and rockets given to Ukraine so far is that Ukraine can launch them from hard-to-detect platforms (Su-24, HIMARS, etc.) from a safe distance and get out of dodge before Russia can muster an armed response.

Anyway:
View attachment 5632101

This does look promising but hopefully the mobile launcher will be as well; unless significant progress has been made since 2019, what vehicle could a Tomahawk be fired from? Any potential candidates so far?
The Wikipedia article source for footnote 45: https://archive.ph/fCuKF and footnote 46: https://ghostarchive.org/archive/LpFVC
The video of launch, DOD Conducts Ground-launched Cruise Missile Test, by Scott Howe, 08.18.2019:

The Precision Strike Missile seems the better candidate, considering its ground-based launcher exists and the US Army has already started to receive them since last month. It has a 400-500km+ maximum range. It can be fired from either a M270 MLRS or M142 HIMARS.

View attachment 5631975
Reformer cucks and Vatniggers got BTFO'd today as an M2 Bradley defeats a T-90M in a tank duel using the chain cannon, despite not being a fucking tank.

Z-zisters, not like this...

 

[Techpriest Mk II]

You would LITERALLY spend your time trying to find endless reasons to NOT give Ukraine what it needs, instead of arguing for the opposite.
You're in the Ukraine thread. You should want Ukraine to be given whatever it needs to push back against Russia.
Anyway:
View attachment 5632101
Also, give Ukraine ships.

Can’t, Turks are blocking the straits to warships of all parties as is their right under international conventions.

While giving the Ukrainians 80 tomahawks and some launchers would be really fucking funny, it’s not going to be as decisive a factor as you’d think. For those 80 tomahawks plus launch systems we could instead provide far more artillery, light armored vehicles, body armor, fuel, smart AT munitions for artillery systems, munitions, ATGM’s and other things which will keep them in the fight longer. While I want the Ukrainians to get more I also understand that the governments involved have limits on what they can easily give or want to give. Russia is still a nuclear power in theory and the ideal is a Ukrainian victory without NATO forces having to fire a single shot in anger themselves.

 

[East_Clintwood]

what vehicle could a Tomahawk be fired from? Any potential candidates so far?

 

[teriyakiburns]

Any potential candidates so far?

None. The US army is working on something, but the only ground launched tomahawk was the BGM-109, which had a specialised - very large - vehicle to launch it. They're all scrapped. Otherwise, it's a naval weapon.

 

[mindlessobserver]

View attachment 5631975
Reformer cucks and Vatniggers got BTFO'd today as an M2 Bradley defeats a T-90M in a tank duel using the chain cannon, despite not being a fucking tank.

This cannot be. I was vociferously assured the performance of the Bradley at the Battle of 73 easting was not an indictment of glorious Russian tanks, but of inept sand nigger tankers! My whole world view is shattered!

 

[Fuck It We'll Do It Live]

Rare Russian electronic warfare complex - “Bylyna” RB-109A gets destroyed via FPV drone:

Detection and correction of the damage, a rare machine of the modern Russian electronic warfare complex - “Bylyna” RB-109A.

After the first visit, the car ignited imperceptibly. Later it burned to the ground. The crew was nearby in the dugout (you can’t see it on the footage, you can take my word for it), they probably stayed there forever.

RB-109A “Bylina” is a Russian automated electronic warfare control system. The system uses (or will use after development) “machine learning-based artificial intelligence capabilities” to prioritize and suppress electronic signals. The system conducts an analysis of the radio-electronic environment within a radius of up to 100 km and creates obstacles to the highest priority targets. There is no exact information about the capabilities and characteristics of the complex.

Warehouses in Saint Petersburg go up on flames over employees' anger over being mobilized.

 

[Pocket Dragoon]

View attachment 5631975
Reformer cucks and Vatniggers got BTFO'd today as an M2 Bradley defeats a T-90M in a tank duel using the chain cannon, despite not being a fucking tank.

In the full video of the engagement, consisting of essentially two parts, I'm pretty sure TOW was used at least once. The T-90 commander was killed at some point during the second, point-blank pass made by the Bradley.

I can't wait to see the HD version of this fight.

 

[Thomas Talus]

The T-90 commander was killed at some point during the second, point-blank pass made by the Bradley.

Was his body weight on the turret controls, causing that constant spinning of the turret we see towards the end?

 

[not william stenchever]

Was his body weight on the turret controls, causing that constant spinning of the turret we see towards the end?

The turret didn't go sub-orbital at least. Total zigger victory.

 

[WhiteNight]

New video from Puck responding to Mike Johnson's foot-dragging:

Puck's basic theme is that Johnson's complaint that Ukraine/Biden have not provided a "strategy" for victory is unreasonable. Military strategy is never static and must always change based on circumstances, and so it's not like they can hand him a piece of paper with Ukraine's strategy. For example, plans have to adapt to what resources will be available, so that Johnson is himself influencing "strategy" by stalling aid.

 

[Snekposter]

This cannot be. I was vociferously assured the performance of the Bradley at the Battle of 73 easting was not an indictment of glorious Russian tanks, but of inept sand nigger tankers! My whole world view is shattered!

Just remember, the T-90 was originally just the T-72BU as late in development in early 1990, but something happened between then and its acceptance in 1992 that would see it renamed despite the fact it was little more than a T-72B with a gunner's sight from the T-80U.

 

[Ghostse]

View attachment 5631975
Reformer cucks and Vatniggers got BTFO'd today as an M2 Bradley defeats a T-90M in a tank duel using the chain cannon, despite not being a fucking tank.

View attachment 5631975
Reformer cucks and Vatniggers got BTFO'd today as an M2 Bradley defeats a T-90M in a tank duel using the chain cannon, despite not being a fucking tank.

Now hold on. The T-90M, the second best tank after the totally real actually being produced at quantity T-14, could never lose to a bradley and their super awesome inpenetrable armor would never fall to mere 25mm autocannon. The bradley is a meme vehicle where 500,000 of the 50 delivered with polish mercenary crews were destroyed by Russian Stronk artillery over the summer because they are garbage compared to the BMP. The Bradley was also never designed to operate in eastern Europe this is impossible.

Clearly this is Russian crewing one of the 50,000 captured trophy bradleys to BTFO out of the inferior Ukraine T-80s full of conscripted welded inside.

New video from Puck responding to Mike Johnson's foot-dragging:

Puck's basic theme is that Johnson's complaint that Ukraine/Biden have not provided a "strategy" for victory is unreasonable. Military strategy is never static and must always change based on circumstances, and so it's not like they can hand him a piece of paper with Ukraine's strategy. For example, plans have to adapt to what resources will be available, so that Johnson is himself influencing "strategy" by stalling aid.

He's right and wrong. You need a flexible doctrine, but you also need SOME sort of end goal and plausible mechanism of achieving it. I guess my main problem (that is along with this guy clearly just being a useful idiot stalling aid) is that he's a politician and wouldn't understand it either. He's a lawyer, never even served.

So it's still worth giving Ukraine A-10s and training their pilots on them, so that they are ready to use them for any such limited windows of opportunity when they may arise.

No. that is time and resources that could be better spent doing things that would yield gains now.

A proper fighter, even one that's aged out to second rate, could also launch sidewinders and would be a better platform to do so, able to get on target faster, get out of danger faster, and has a chance of out manuevering a locked missile.

The A-10 is a good plane, but it was intended to take NVA radar-guided AA guns, and possibly survive run-ins with the smaller warheads of the SA-2, and its - in short - shit-tier terminal tracking. The S300's 5v55rs have double or triple the warhead size and better terminal tracking and faster speed. S400's even bigger. Tanking the hit isn't an option, you need to out manuever and that's not the A-10s strong point.

Frigate/destroyers-sized ships that could easily meet the same fate as the Moskva via anti-ship missiles. And not even Russia's submarines have been safe from Ukrainian Storm Shadows.

Solid agree Other than light shore patrol craft, the only thing Ukraine would get any possible benefit from would be subs. Any decent sized surface combatant is going to be a missile magnet.

Can’t, Turks are blocking the straits to warships of all parties as is their right under international conventions.

While giving the Ukrainians 80 tomahawks and some launchers would be really fucking funny, it’s not going to be as decisive a factor as you’d think. For those 80 tomahawks plus launch systems we could instead provide far more artillery, light armored vehicles, body armor, fuel, smart AT munitions for artillery systems, munitions, ATGM’s and other things which will keep them in the fight longer. While I want the Ukrainians to get more I also understand that the governments involved have limits on what they can easily give or want to give. Russia is still a nuclear power in theory and the ideal is a Ukrainian victory without NATO forces having to fire a single shot in anger themselves.

All this shit right here.

 

[No. 7 cat]

New video from Puck responding to Mike Johnson's foot-dragging:

Puck's basic theme is that Johnson's complaint that Ukraine/Biden have not provided a "strategy" for victory is unreasonable. Military strategy is never static and must always change based on circumstances, and so it's not like they can hand him a piece of paper with Ukraine's strategy. For example, plans have to adapt to what resources will be available, so that Johnson is himself influencing "strategy" by stalling aid.

The naval instructor discounts Mike Johnson in his very polite way, simply that he does not understand how strategy operates, but commenters makes a wise point that the video taking Johnson as acting in good faith (I suppose it's a device for the purposes of the video). Johnson and his colleagues are probably still wowed how Nancy Pelosi became a billionairess by mysterious and de facto legal means (insider trading I think), so some of Hy Brasil (an always just out of reach legendary island known to medieval marines) strategy where things are dangled before Ukraine (or whoever has lobbyists) so any lobbyists will spread money their way. If Ukraine cannot spare funds to lobby them, then too bad. The Democrats too are holding things up by refusing any compromise on border security (altho the GOP bill seems a bit of a mess and probably not meant to work, solving problems might reduce work for these 'problem solvers').

John Bolton says NATO will collapse if Trump comes to power (I embedded the link as downloaded files upload to 100% but won't allow me to select embed). Alarmism from the fmr National Security Advisor, but it likely wouldn't be good for Ukraine given how corrupted and subverted the radical wing of the GOP has become (but again politicians usually have opinions, but they also have price tags for which their virtue can be purchased, however wading through that morass would be of limited use to Ukraine given that they don't have the always saleable indigenous resources of Russia).

 

[AgendaPoster]

Puck's basic theme is that Johnson's complaint that Ukraine/Biden have not provided a "strategy" for victory is unreasonable. Military strategy is never static and must always change based on circumstances, and so it's not like they can hand him a piece of paper with Ukraine's strategy. For example, plans have to adapt to what resources will be available, so that Johnson is himself influencing "strategy" by stalling aid.

The strategy demands are actually a political ploy to force Biden and his regime to admit that without way, way more military aid of the proper type, Ukraine cannot achieve any victory as it has no means to overcome the Russian numbers and economy. If Biden would be to come with that path to victory, it would be many billions, lots of rockets, shells, artillery systems, tanks and ammo and so on, coupled with financial help so the Ukrainian state can pay its employees/healthcare etc. If those numbers would be made known to the US citizens, Biden would lose even the small chances he has for reelection.
IMO it's pointless to approach this from a military perspective. Quantity of what is needed is above all else. It's pointless to theorize where to strike and with what when there is not enough military gear for that.

 

[mindlessobserver]

In the full video of the engagement, consisting of essentially two parts, I'm pretty sure TOW was used at least once. The T-90 commander was killed at some point during the second, point-blank pass made by the Bradley. I can't wait to see the HD version of this fight.

You all made fun of me. You said I was just a buffoon, developing a troop transport that can't carry troops, with a tank turret despite not being a tank, and can float. Well guess what you pansy assed chucklefucks. Apparently there really are two people in this world. People who know what they are doing, and nancy naysayers prancing about pretending to be smart. Clearly I knew what I was doing, so what does that make you?

 

[Snekposter]

I can't wait to see the HD version of this fight.

Be careful what you wish for. Its probably going to have shitty Slav Eurobeat (Slavbeat?) overlaid it all.

 

[teriyakiburns]

Clearly I knew what I was doing, so what does that make you?

Perhaps it makes me a professional psychiatrist with real clients, instead of a performing monkey in a fancy suit.