Russia on brink of ... NOPE! Russia INVADES Ukraine!

Page 1231 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
25,448
31,135
136
No coming back from that. Pressure hull breach plus a fire? Might as well be on the bottom.

Russia takes a decade or more to retrofit working vessels, and that's when they're not at war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ajay

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
44,119
28,723
136
Apparently Brazil is running into problems keeping their Leopard 1A5 tank fleet operational. Germany, for Ukraine, has sucked down all the available spare parts on the market.

They've be better off selling their 1A5s to Ukraine (or to the Germans if that makes them feel better) and buying some decent used third gen tanks but they probably won't.
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
14,122
7,007
136
There are reports that China have effectively cut off Russia at the knees. Maybe in reaction to their attempt of a deal with North Korea?
I think so.

f this is true, its likely that there will be no military equipment coming from North Korea. Maybe the whole North Korean meeting was a bluff to the West... try to convince them that Russia is in it for the long war. But with China out of this game, I can't see North Korea being willing to keep Russia in the game.

NK will find a way to ship their hardware to Russia. They hate the Chinese anyway. It couldn't have been a bluff, Russia really needs NK's arty, etc.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
32,704
6,833
136
Apparently there is an outdated document from Poland that details their emergency plan in case of Russian invasion.
The striking thing is, no MAD. Just purely conventional thinking and planning. As if no one in NATO would actually protect each other with nukes.
If a member of NATO knows this is the plan, every man for himself.....

Why would Russia ever stop at just Ukraine?

Poland planned to surrender 40% of its territories in case of Russian invasion

“The plan for the use of the armed forces, approved by the then head of the Defense Ministry Klich, stipulated that the country’s independent defense would last a maximum of two weeks, and in seven days the enemy would reach the right bank of the Vistula. The documents clearly show that Lublin, Rzeszów, and Łomża could have been a Polish Bucha,” Błaszczak said.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
81,306
43,320
136
Apparently there is an outdated document from Poland that details their emergency plan in case of Russian invasion.
The striking thing is, no MAD. Just purely conventional thinking and planning. As if no one in NATO would actually protect each other with nukes.
If a member of NATO knows this is the plan, every man for himself.....

Why would Russia ever stop at just Ukraine?

Poland planned to surrender 40% of its territories in case of Russian invasion

“The plan for the use of the armed forces, approved by the then head of the Defense Ministry Klich, stipulated that the country’s independent defense would last a maximum of two weeks, and in seven days the enemy would reach the right bank of the Vistula. The documents clearly show that Lublin, Rzeszów, and Łomża could have been a Polish Bucha,” Błaszczak said.
That is…uhhh….not what the document says. It’s discussing strategy to win the war by delaying the Russian army until the US arrives, not a planned permanent surrender.

Plan A in a war between NATO and Russia was and always will be to leverage NATO’s overwhelming conventional superiority to force the Russians to surrender and use nukes only as a last resort. It’s a smart plan!
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
44,119
28,723
136
Based on previous analysis trading land for time before NATO firepower could be brought to bear is a good plan. This assumed a much higher level of effectiveness of Russian ground forces though and well..yeah.

Also reasons Poland is buying, almost literally, every weapon system they can get their hands on. Including a "fuck you" amount of tanks, artillery, and especially MLRS.
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
20,855
4,092
126
Hard to tell if the actual hull is breached or not as I'm not familiar with the Superstructure and Ballast Tank configuration. But if the hull is breached (which it appears to be) or there is any warping from the fire, that fucker is done! Even if not it will be out of service for years....

I think it's done for.
 
Last edited:

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
44,119
28,723
136
Hard to tell if the actual hull is breached or not as I'm not familiar with the Superstructure and Ballast Tank configuration. But if the hull is breached (which it appears to be) or there is any warping from the fire, that fucker is done! Even if not it will be out of service for years....

I think it's done for.

It would likely be faster just to scrap it and build a new one even if a repair might be possible, which I think is what they'll do. 636.6 production line is still open.
 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,466
3,237
136
Based on previous analysis trading land for time before NATO firepower could be brought to bear is a good plan. This assumed a much higher level of effectiveness of Russian ground forces though and well..yeah.

Also reasons Poland is buying, almost literally, every weapon system they can get their hands on. Including a "fuck you" amount of tanks, artillery, and especially MLRS.

I listened to a military historian talk about this strategy, called "defense in depth". Basically an army weakens the further it advances, so a strategic retreat while periodically engaging them is far more effective than trying to stop them at the initial point of advance. Especially if you're expecting reinforcements in the near future.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
44,119
28,723
136
I listened to a military historian talk about this strategy, called "defense in depth". Basically an army weakens the further it advances, so a strategic retreat while periodically engaging them is far more effective than trying to stop them at the initial point of advance. Especially if you're expecting reinforcements in the near future.

Which made sense for Poland and probably will until a few years from now when the bulk of their new armaments are delivered and integrated.
 

Pens1566

Lifer
Oct 11, 2005
10,761
6,705
136
I listened to a military historian talk about this strategy, called "defense in depth". Basically an army weakens the further it advances, so a strategic retreat while periodically engaging them is far more effective than trying to stop them at the initial point of advance. Especially if you're expecting reinforcements in the near future.

Always was the combined NATO plan. Retreat through the fulda gap and melt the advancing armor with air and tech superiority to counter superior #s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
4,990
1,125
136
I listened to a military historian talk about this strategy, called "defense in depth". Basically an army weakens the further it advances, so a strategic retreat while periodically engaging them is far more effective than trying to stop them at the initial point of advance. Especially if you're expecting reinforcements in the near future.

Nazi Germany used this technique in 1943 after the defeat of the 6th Army at Stalingrad to stabilize the Eastern front. The Germans allowed the Soviets to overextend themselves and then counterattacked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: [DHT]Osiris

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
24,693
8,736
136
Hard to tell if the actual hull is breached or not as I'm not familiar with the Superstructure and Ballast Tank configuration. But if the hull is breached (which it appears to be) or there is any warping from the fire, that fucker is done! Even if not it will be out of service for years....

I think it's done for.
Maybe they can repurpose it for tours of the Titanic—just put giant windows where the holes are!!
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,057
6,371
136
It would likely be faster just to scrap it and build a new one even if a repair might be possible, which I think is what they'll do. 636.6 production line is still open.


I'd bet that 9 out of ten automotive and home insurance adjusters agree with your assessment. The lone outrider felt that repairing the Challenger Space Shuttle was doable.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: GodisanAtheist

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
20,855
4,092
126
It would likely be faster just to scrap it and build a new one even if a repair might be possible, which I think is what they'll do. 636.6 production line is still open.

The US had to scrap the USS Miami due to a fire set by a Yardbird so he could get off work early.

 
  • Wow
Reactions: pmv and Ajay

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
32,704
6,833
136
That is…uhhh….not what the document says. It’s discussing strategy to win the war by delaying the Russian army until the US arrives, not a planned permanent surrender.

Plan A in a war between NATO and Russia was and always will be to leverage NATO’s overwhelming conventional superiority to force the Russians to surrender and use nukes only as a last resort. It’s a smart plan!
A last resort, to save who?

I say it is "every man for himself" when it comes to the nuclear deterrent. And it is.
MAD is supposed to result in everyone killed. So why risk it, why kill you and your family over Poland?
That Poland has conventional plans makes something very clear. They have no nuclear shield. Russia is "free" to attack Europe up until the UK and France. Rest of the continent is conventional warfare.

With conventional, all Russia needs is a US President to flip Turkey and betray NATO. We will be in too much disarray to save Ukraine, Moldova, Baltics, etc. There is no end to Russia's ambition. Once they gain enough ground, it helps set the stage for the next invasion. Eastern Europe better pray Ukraine can take Crimea. Or they are next.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
81,306
43,320
136
A last resort, to save who?

I say it is "every man for himself" when it comes to the nuclear deterrent. And it is.
MAD is supposed to result in everyone killed. So why risk it, why kill you and your family over Poland?
That Poland has conventional plans makes something very clear. They have no nuclear shield. Russia is "free" to attack Europe up until the UK and France. Rest of the continent is conventional warfare.

With conventional, all Russia needs is a US President to flip Turkey and betray NATO. We will be in too much disarray to save Ukraine, Moldova, Baltics, etc. There is no end to Russia's ambition. Once they gain enough ground, it helps set the stage for the next invasion. Eastern Europe better pray Ukraine can take Crimea. Or they are next.
So why even have conventional forces then?
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
20,855
4,092
126

So they made a mental health patient work there under heavy medication? Hope they learned their lesson.

Everybody in jail is innocent... Just ask them.

He wasn't "made" to work anywhere. He was free to leave/quit anytime he wanted, he was a civilian yard bird.

Article was from May 2015.

Fury now admits to setting the smaller fire and pulling a fire alarm on another date, but not setting the $400 million fire, for which he'd previously taken responsibility.

But he didn't set the big fire. Really? If he felt the way he describes he should have quit his job and moved on to something else. Instead he chose to endanger innocent people. Anyway he is still in jail where he belongs.
 
Last edited:

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
22,081
11,814
136
Just liquidate Hungary to pay for the grain. Ship the Hungarians to Russia and shuttle in Europes migrant crisis to their new land. Tired of Hungary.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: kage69 and Jimminy

ASK THE COMMUNITY