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

Page 314 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

KMFJD

Lifer
Aug 11, 2005
29,137
42,112
136
Good for bunkers, but that's about it. Gotta get kinda close too. If the Russians are digging in it will be useful though. We have plenty of SMAWs and they are cheaper than high end drones. Making a hole to sit in really does sound like a poor way to deal with marauding drones, though making yourself hard to see/reach from ground forces is always helpful. Didn't work for the Armenians if memory serves.


RPG-9s, LAWs, Javelins, NLAWs, Stingers, GROMs, Panzerfausts, RPV-16s, Starstreaks, and now SMAWs. Did Carl get invited? Is he there?

Ukraine is turning into the Baskin-Robbins of large bore tube weaponry. Get some Russia.
I think Canada sent over 4,000 Karl's
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
15,429
7,847
136
If you're the Ukrainians this is what you want to see. Halting advances and seeing them dig in.

IDK, depends on how far those units are away from the cities. It doesn't seem like the UA is venturing very far away from cities and surrounding towns unless moving between positions. Parking tracked an motorized vehicles 40km away, waiting for resupply could become a serious issue in a couple of weeks.
 
Nov 17, 2019
10,763
6,451
136
How much can they do?

Russian missile stockpile almost exhausted, arms industry working around the clock - General Sta

www.pravda.com.ua.ico
pravda.com.ua|13 hours ago
Russian troops have used up almost their entire stockpile of missiles and some types of ammunition. As a result, a number of companies working in the Russian arms industry have been switched to round-the-clock mode.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger Wilco
Nov 17, 2019
10,763
6,451
136
Ukraine's Armed Forces again attack airfield in Chornobayivka used by invaders - Arestovych

www.ukrinform.net.ico
Ukrinform|6 hours ago
Ukraine's Armed Forces again attacked the airfield in Chornobayivka, Kherson region, which is used by Russian invaders to base command posts and aircraft. — Ukrinform.


I've seen numbers from 7,000 to 30,000 ....


How Russia crumbled after invasion - 28,000 killed or wounded and Putin weakened

www.mirror.co.uk.ico
The Mirror|8 hours ago
Russia was forced to confirm that yet another of its military leaders, and one of Russia's top paratroop commanders, has been killed in battle, along with his deputy
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
46,021
32,993
136
IDK, depends on how far those units are away from the cities. It doesn't seem like the UA is venturing very far away from cities and surrounding towns unless moving between positions. Parking tracked an motorized vehicles 40km away, waiting for resupply could become a serious issue in a couple of weeks.

*faint buzzing noises at night*

“Hey Yuri, do you hear someth….”
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
15,429
7,847
136
*faint buzzing noises at night*

“Hey Yuri, do you hear someth….”
Lol! I like your thinking, but the UA just doesn't have enough drones to do this yet (well, not to great enough effect). Wish they did. They do have very large numbers of guided and unguided anti-armor weapons - so if they can get enough small squads (well, large enough to hump in enough missiles**) out to areas like this, the UA could do allot of damage. Any launcher with infrared sighting abilities would make for great night hunting. I don't think the Russians posses the man power or coordination right now to go hunting for dozens of teams like this fighting in the rear. Especially when the UA units know the lay of the land so well. This would mainly be a form of harassment, kill lots of Russian conscripts and put a dent in morale. Force the Russians to put helos in the air to hunt for them and carry some stingers... blah, blah, blah. Taking off my armchair general's hat and plunking my butt in front of the TV for the night.



** Duh, with 4x4 trucks or something for missiles, supplies and gear.
 
Last edited:

RnR_au

Golden Member
Jun 6, 2021
1,705
4,152
106
We sure Rupert is actually Australian?
Yeah... sorry. He is pretty potent here in Australia with his media empire. His flagship newspaper The Australian has been running at a loss for years, but when you get multiple Prime Ministers (from the Liberal Party - the Conservatives here in AU) willing to fly to the states fawning over him, I guess the losses are worth it. His cable news tv network is mostly ok during the day, but 'Sky after dark' is when the rabid right-wing pundits come out and throw spittle at the cameras.

He is one of the more loathed men in Australia... a loathing that is usually reserved for politicians.
 

rommelrommel

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2002
4,382
3,111
146
China is much larger, and growing much more advanced by the year.
Taiwan has a massive ocean between it and its allies. They would quickly find themselves isolated and alone. There is no comparison.
China will use mines / drones to sink anything approaching their defensive position, it'll be over before it begins.

Billion dollar fleet will lose to million dollar drone arrays.

This is some bullshit, Taiwan has plentiful stocks of munitions and an excellent defensive position on the whole. They have very reasonable odds of holding off a PRC assault on their own as it is.
 

rommelrommel

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2002
4,382
3,111
146
Question is Taiwan's logistical options for "re-supplies" if/when shit hits. Also how deep western intelligence is digged-in in the area. Ukraine is sort of special in that regard.

edit: But, if as the case with Ukraine, Taiwan wants western ideals democracy and individual freedoms ... I dont see why there is not boots on the ground. Should be. Fuck em.

Taiwan has a lot of these sorts of man portable anti armour and anti air weapons as they know their larger assets will be hard to protect against PRC bombardment. Providing intel would seem to be an easy give, the real question is will the USA, Japan, and other regional rivals of the PRC intervene with naval and air assets. If they were to, the PRC is decades away from any chance of forcing a crossing.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,296
28,496
136

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,493
3,159
136
I must go back to Trump, because Donald Trump figures into this to such a great extent. The enabling of Putin to think he can do what Putin is now doing goes straight back to the Trump era. And when Trump says THIS WOULD NEVER HAPPEN UNDER MY PRESIDENCY, Trump is correct. Correct in that THE TRUMP/PUTIN PLAN was never meant to proceed until during a Trump second term. By then, in a second term, Trump's minimizing and condemnation of NATO would have been complete thus enabling Putin to proceed.

So yeah, this war would have never taken place during a Trump first term presidency, but would have definitely taken place during a Trump second term presidency, the part Donald Trump fails to tell you.
Trump and Putin wanted and planned for this Ukraine absorption into Russia to take place, thus the reasoning for Donald Trump's anti NATO rhetoric during Trump's first term. Putin invading Ukraine was not intended under Trump's first term, on that Trump is correct, it was planned and intended by the two to take place under Trump's SECOND TERM, but the unexpected then happened... Donald Trump lost. Donald Trump lost, and Putin simply had to proceed on his own, with or without Donald Trump.

On top of all this you have the republicans in comgress now pretending that they actually care. Imagine their words if Trump were the president today? Imagine what they would say to justify the aggressive behavior of Putin? Actually, we already know what republicans in congress would say as a whole, Marjorie Taylor Greene is saying that now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Number1

rommelrommel

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2002
4,382
3,111
146
I must go back to Trump, because Donald Trump figures into this to such a great extent. The enabling of Putin to think he can do what Putin is now doing goes straight back to the Trump era. And when Trump says THIS WOULD NEVER HAPPEN UNDER MY PRESIDENCY, Trump is correct. Correct in that THE TRUMP/PUTIN PLAN was never meant to proceed until during a Trump second term. By then, in a second term, Trump's minimizing and condemnation of NATO would have been complete thus enabling Putin to proceed.

So yeah, this war would have never taken place during a Trump first term presidency, but would have definitely taken place during a Trump second term presidency, the part Donald Trump fails to tell you.
Trump and Putin wanted and planned for this Ukraine absorption into Russia to take place, thus the reasoning for Donald Trump's anti NATO rhetoric during Trump's first term. Putin invading Ukraine was not intended under Trump's first term, on that Trump is correct, it was planned and intended by the two to take place under Trump's SECOND TERM, but the unexpected then happened... Donald Trump lost. Donald Trump lost, and Putin simply had to proceed on his own, with or without Donald Trump.

On top of all this you have the republicans in comgress now pretending that they actually care. Imagine their words if Trump were the president today? Imagine what they would say to justify the aggressive behavior of Putin? Actually, we already know what republicans in congress would say as a whole, Marjorie Taylor Greene is saying that now.

And it wouldn’t have been much of a war, without the intel and weapons along with general international support Ukraine would have had a poor hand and probably have had to agree to some sort of terms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ajay

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
13,034
7,963
136
yes but it can amplify your initial Nazism--but also consider that you are talking about the ave foot soldier in the German army at the time. They served in the Nazi army, but it's not like any of them had any choice. I'm certain there were some bona fide Nazis among them, but a lot of those kids were just soldiers. The Nazi Nazis were the SS and of course central leadership and much of command.

But, all it takes is a push with the drugs, some amped up warblood fighting with your friends, and your brain is definitely going to be fucked.

Kind of explains the United States rural addiction to meth, Trump, and the worst imaginable traits that humanity has ever produced: which we call the GOP. It's really not unlike how an entire generation of young brains in the German military were permanently fucked by meth and propaganda and violent self-certainty.


This is really going off-topic, but I'm not sure I agree. As I understand it, the motivation of many of the atrocities carried out by the Germans was explicit Nazi ideology as well as a more-general, and much-more-long-standing murderous anti-semitism. I don't know, though, it would take some sort of real scholarship to disentangle the role of ideology and drug-damaged brains for each specific horror and I'm only going on half-remembered random reading (e.g. Goldhagen or Browning made the point that many of them _did_ have a choice - and they chose to commit mass murder). Though I also have the impression that even among real scholars these arguments rage rather furiously (famously illustrated by the conference of Holocaust scholars where one academic talked about wanting to 'strangle' Goldhagen).

But in the accounts I've seen about the Nazis and their drug use, I don't recall it being suggested that meth was a primary causal factor in the likes of Lidice or St Oradour or Malmedy or all those Einsatzgruppen mass killings.
 
Last edited:

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
13,034
7,963
136
China is much larger, and growing much more advanced by the year.
Taiwan has a massive ocean between it and its allies. They would quickly find themselves isolated and alone. There is no comparison.
China will use mines / drones to sink anything approaching their defensive position, it'll be over before it begins.

Billion dollar fleet will lose to million dollar drone arrays.


I haven't seen anything to refute the point I heard early on, that China and Russia are in very different positions regarding the current world order. Putin has every incentive to want to smash up the existing, US-dominated, global order, even in an entirely destructive way.

China, in contrast, has a vested interest in continuing stability and continuing global trade and low prices for oil and other basic resources. China wants to become more signficant and powerful _within_ the existing order, Russia (at least Putin) has strong incentives to want to see that order fall apart.