- Joined
- Sep 15, 2016
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Saw an interesting article in the Kyiiiiyyv Post today…
View attachment 5839120
Now granted: I’m no military strategist… But I can’t help but wonder how they can say that the target was HUR/GUR facilities, AND simultaneously claim that they “absolutely” did not hit any.
Things that make you go:![]()
This is exactly why the US said "cut it out" and Ukraine went "you can't stop meeee". From eurointegration.com.ua (archive):This is a massive escalation. He's also allegeing if you hit 20 more of them like this Russian oil production would be crippled.
Stefanyshina on alleged US calls not to hit Russian refineries: We act according to NATO standards
Deputy Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration of Ukraine Olha Stefanyshyna has commented on rumors about alleged calls from Washington for Ukraine not to hit Russian oil refineries, noting that such an approach would be considered correct by NATO standards.
According to the European Pravda news agency, she said this during a discussion at the Kiev Security Forum when asked about an article in the Financial Times, which said that the USA allegedly urged Ukraine to stop hitting the Russian oil refining industry.
Olha Stefanyshyna noted that there had already been statements from other Kiev officials that from the military point of view Russian energy infrastructure was a legitimate target.
"We understand the call of our American partners. At the same time, we are fighting with the capabilities, resources and practices we have today," Stefanyshyna said.
"I would like to remind my colleagues who make such statements and publish such statements in the FT that when I spoke to NATO headquarters in February 2022 about them playing their role and appealing to the UN because they are capable of closing the skies, they said, 'Olga, you don't understand NATO standards,' and that in the NATO understanding this means first of all destroying the infrastructure on Russian territory that gives them the ability to bomb Ukrainian cities, factories that produce missiles." Actually, we are acting in accordance with the best NATO standards," the deputy prime minister said.
As a reminder, the FT publication, citing sources, said that the US allegedly urged Kiev not to launch any more strikes on Russian refineries and other energy infrastructure, as they fear that this could lead to an even greater escalation and cause a global rise in energy prices.
I want a drone that is just a flying disco ball. It will illuminate the battlefield and unite us all in dance.The vehicle had no driver or gunner, and was instead a land drone, an early example of the robot-like vehicles that Ukraine is increasingly using to hit enemy forces, clear and lay land mines and rescue injured soldiers.
Since Russia’s invasion two years ago, Ukraine has revolutionized warfare with its use of drones in the air and at sea. Now it wants to do the same with unmanned ground vehicles, or UGVs, aiming to replicate the low-cost, do-it-yourself approach that it has used to such deadly effect.
The F-16 is very fussy about the condition of the runways, right?
Yes. There has to be a crew on standby to patch damage done by missiles but one would really need to see what the damage was to make an assessment.The F-16 is very fussy about the condition of the runways, right?
Macron can't run for the third consecutive turn.
Let us for a moment assume that it is 202X, Putin has won and Ukraine is no more. This will leave him with a battle-hardened army... on the border of Europe... that has completely, uttersly shat itself by throwing all of its arsenal into the raging dumpster fire and is standing with its pants down. The temptation to score a few extra geopolitical goals will be strong.
Of course, Putin has not yet won and the Russian army does not have the capacity to capture large population centers like Kharkov. Yet.
I'd have to ask if those drones and radar planes have gained any meaningful intelligence before getting shot down or analyzed for ECW or other counterintelligence strategies.
The F-16 is very fussy about the condition of the runways, right?
It depends on what they hit. The distillation towers are the most important part of an oil refinery.View attachment 5839181
This is a massive escalation. He's also allegeing if you hit 20 more of them like this Russian oil production would be crippled.
Maybe Russia should proactively idle some refineries that support Americans and such to temporarily cause oil prices to spike?It depends on what they hit. The distillation towers are the most important part of an oil refinery.
Oh this also has the knock on effect of making oil/NG and gasoline prices higher globally so it'll piss off Americans who'll be paying 25% more for fuel for at least a few months.....
Holes. That said they're supposed to be able to fill them and get the runway ready for operations in less than 24 hours.
Not much more than any jet that isn't an A-10 or a Mig-29. FOD isn't friendly to any jet engine.The F-16 is very fussy about the condition of the runways, right?
Same as J-10, Typhoon, Rafale, and Su-27. The Gripen has semi- low mounted intakes because the jet is small and they're mid mounted in the wingroot. It's not taking off from a dirt road.That tends to be the case when you have a giant dustsucker under the cockpit:
![]()
So that's why gas jumped 80 cents in a day.It depends on what they hit. The distillation towers are the most important part of an oil refinery.
Oh this also has the knock on effect of making oil/NG and gasoline prices higher globally so it'll piss off Americans who'll be paying 25% more for fuel for at least a few months.....
Does that include craters?Holes. That said they're supposed to be able to fill them and get the runway ready for operations in less than 24 hours
Su-27 has titanium grids in intakes. MiG-29 has intakes above fuselage for takeoff. Russian planes are designed to operate on rough airfields.Holes. That said they're supposed to be able to fill them and get the runway ready for operations in less than 24 hours.
Not much more than any jet that isn't an A-10 or a Mig-29. FOD isn't friendly to any jet engine.
Most fighter jets have relatively low air intakes, look at the Rafale, Super Hornet, Su-27/30/35, F-22, F/A-50, J-10, JF-17, Typhoon, Gripen.
All mid wing or Chin mounted.
Same as J-10, Typhoon, Rafale, and Su-27. The Gripen has semi- low mounted intakes because the jet is small and they're mid mounted in the wingroot. It's not taking off from a dirt road.
View attachment 5839354
Either way I find it hilarious that Slavs of all people would think anything positive of Adolf Hitler.
I do not think Macron is bluffing since they decided on wanting to restock on nuclear weapons and Macron before all this shit took place dreamed of building an EU army even if NATO already existed. Since the world is watching NATO could have saved whatever dignity they had and preserve their image to the world of being the most powerful fighting force out there. But thanks to Macron he might have ruined that image that whoever is in NATO is sitting in a cuck chair. You see people like making fun of France for surrender jokes and since they belong in NATO and got voluntarily involved it would make any other NATO country look like pussies that the French are more willing to fight with Russia than they are, and they had a chance during the war to fight Russia but chose not to.The thing with Brinkmanship is that you have to not be bluffing. Macron and NATO are Bluffing.
I do not think Macron is bluffing since they decided on wanting to restock on nuclear weapons and Macron before all this shit took place dreamed of building an EU army even if NATO already existed. Since the world is watching NATO could have saved whatever dignity they had and preserve their image to the world of being the most powerful fighting force out there. But thanks to Macron he might have ruined that image that whoever is in NATO is sitting in a cuck chair. You see people like making fun of France for surrender jokes and since they belong in NATO and got voluntarily involved it would make any other NATO country look like pussies that the French are more willing to fight with Russia than they are, and they had a chance during the war to fight Russia but chose not to.
During the war I have seen so many comments saying how lucky Russia is that NATO didn't get involved, even if Russia was to reach its goals during the end of the war, we would still see those same comments or arguments being claimed. Thanks to Macron, fanboys across the world can no longer make that claim if he follows through sending those troops to Ukraine than thumping his chest. If he sends those troops and no other country does, and they get demolished later he can at least save Frances image from making anymore surrender jokes. If those troops get demolished, I think they will be pissed off more at Macron for sending them there than they are at Russia for killing them assuming he thinks he can rally up a lot of people for mobilization.