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

Page 879 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
16,094
8,109
136
It is important, these U.S. officials say, not to give Mr. Putin an excuse to expand the war."
I have also struggled with the angst over the immense suffering of the Ukrainian people at the hands of Moscow. I desperately wish our government would give the UA ATACAMS.

To the point though, expand where? As @rommelrommel points out, especially now that we know the abysmal condition of the Russian military, any incursion into a NATO state would be the end of them. Think of what happened to the Iraqis' fleeing Kuwait city on highway 80.

The lingering thought in the back of everyone's mind is whether Putin's self delusion has reached the point where he thinks he can turn the tables with the use short range nuclear weapons. He might actually think that we won't respond by direct attacks on Russian soil. As best I can tell, that's the nightmare scenario that merits the most caution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drach

Indus

Lifer
May 11, 2002
12,103
8,471
136
I have also struggled with the angst over the immense suffering of the Ukrainian people at the hands of Moscow. I desperately wish our government would give the UA ATACAMS.

To the point though, expand where? As @rommelrommel points out, especially now that we know the abysmal condition of the Russian military, any incursion into a NATO state would be the end of them. Think of what happened to the Iraqis' fleeing Kuwait city on highway 80.

The lingering thought in the back of everyone's mind is whether Putin's self delusion has reached the point where he thinks he can turn the tables with the use short range nuclear weapons. He might actually think that we won't respond by direct attacks on Russian soil. As best I can tell, that's the nightmare scenario that merits the most caution.

I'm reading the people of kherson are being hit by incendiary bombs today.

Makes 0 sense unless Russia gets off on hurting as many civilians as possible!

Err found the link:

 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
48,246
37,668
136
I have also struggled with the angst over the immense suffering of the Ukrainian people at the hands of Moscow. I desperately wish our government would give the UA ATACAMS.

To the point though, expand where? As @rommelrommel points out, especially now that we know the abysmal condition of the Russian military, any incursion into a NATO state would be the end of them. Think of what happened to the Iraqis' fleeing Kuwait city on highway 80.

The lingering thought in the back of everyone's mind is whether Putin's self delusion has reached the point where he thinks he can turn the tables with the use short range nuclear weapons. He might actually think that we won't respond by direct attacks on Russian soil. As best I can tell, that's the nightmare scenario that merits the most caution.

I'd settle for GLSDB and lots of SDBs/JDAM ERs at this point. It would also relieve pressure on the GMLRS supply.

Also can we send them some surplus Bradley's at least for christ's sake instead of clapped out BMPs from all over Europe?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ajay and Leeea

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
34,067
8,085
136
I'm reading the people of kherson are being hit by incendiary bombs today.

Makes 0 sense unless Russia gets off on hurting as many civilians as possible!

Russia's goal from day 1 has been ethnic cleansing.
Firing death and destruction into the center of a fully populated city is just par the course.
 

rommelrommel

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2002
4,411
3,192
146
I'd settle for GLSDB and lots of SDBs/JDAM ERs at this point. It would also relieve pressure on the GMLRS supply.

Also can we send them some surplus Bradley's at least for christ's sake instead of clapped out BMPs from all over Europe?

They know how to operate and have parts/mechanics for those BMP and such.

It is beyond the point of needing to start to train them on more western systems tho.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,363
13,691
146
Nuclear ICBMs?
I cannot, and will NEVER, advocate for nuclear proliferation. Every weapon and every group that has a weapon, is just more certainty that humanity will end itself.

And a nation whose future existence is VERY much in question, whose morality may be shattered after suffering hundreds of thousands of atrocities, accumulating on a daily basis...
They will want vengeance. They will want blood. There is no reason to believe you are handing them over to a stable and peace loving government. Or even if you did... that said government would remain in power. There is bloody turmoil over there, Ukraine has been shattered and only exists on our aid. Aid that will be stopped in a year. Russia has thrown everything it has into destroying Ukraine, do not be so hasty into thinking it failed in this regard.

In upcoming years, as foreign aid declines, the damage will become evident. What remains will be seen. And Ukraine will need to pass certain tests to get into EU / NATO. But nuclear proliferation? There is no test that anyone can pass to satisfy my sense of safety. Humans are irrational actors, MAD presumes we are not. The thought that MAD provides long term security is based on a lie. Some day it will fail. If you want to live, if you want future generations to live, we must do everything in our power to minimize that risk.
Yeah but nukes effectively ended world wars. Ww3 would have likely happened in the 50's-70's otherwise. Hundreds of millions would have died.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
24,281
10,935
136
I am wondering what the half life of the USSR nukes is.

With the state of how bad the Russian military is run and their constant problems.. you have to wonder if they're actually maintained/ effective at the moment.

Hell comically one could wonder how many Tsar Bomba's they needed to actually have the Tsar Bomba go boom!
Half life of tritium is approximately 12 years. Must be updated periodically.
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
16,094
8,109
136
I'd settle for GLSDB and lots of SDBs/JDAM ERs at this point. It would also relieve pressure on the GMLRS supply.

Also can we send them some surplus Bradley's at least for christ's sake instead of clapped out BMPs from all over Europe?
Good point - anything to increase standoff range and open up new targeting possibilities. Stripping the Russian army of it's heavy equipment before it can reach the front will just leave their hapless infantry with almost no support. There are so many NSFL videos out now of air burst arty round kill entire squads in trenches that it's a bit sickening, but necessary. Poor dumb bastards - their only sin is being born in Russia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KMFJD

Indus

Lifer
May 11, 2002
12,103
8,471
136
Poor dumb bastards - their only sin is being born in Russia.

And supporting, defending, protecting and often facilitating the side committing war crimes!

The smart ones have already run away!
 
Last edited:

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
28,831
40,425
136
Another idiot who twists statistics to insult India and Indians.


I noticed you tried to paint the gold teeth story on others here as some kind of proof of propaganda.

Now do a search and you will see that story was debunked here in this very thread months ago. Are you a liar, lazy, or both? I think you owe someone an apology.

This thread is about Russia's invasion and war on Ukraine, wouldn't your butthurt about India fit in some other thread better?
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
34,067
8,085
136
Yeah but nukes effectively ended world wars. Ww3 would have likely happened in the 50's-70's otherwise. Hundreds of millions would have died.

One exchange can do a lot more than 100 million.
Besides, Russia is proving that such peace was only temporary. MAD is not a permanent solution. The peace we enjoyed is going to come with a price that has yet to be paid. Nuclear proliferation would only accelerate us towards that end.
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
28,831
40,425
136
t2MRsNM.jpg
 

Indus

Lifer
May 11, 2002
12,103
8,471
136
I noticed you tried to paint the gold teeth story on others here as some kind of proof of propaganda.

Now do a search and you will see that story was debunked here in this very thread months ago. Are you a liar, lazy, or both? I think you owe someone an apology.

This thread is about Russia's invasion and war on Ukraine, wouldn't your butthurt about India fit in some other thread better?

Just put him on ignore.

One exchange can do a lot more than 100 million.
Besides, Russia is proving that such peace was only temporary. MAD is not a permanent solution. The peace we enjoyed is going to come with a price that has yet to be paid. Nuclear proliferation would only accelerate us towards that end.

I have serious doubts about COMPETENT MAINTENANCE by the Russkies on their nukes! Like are they truly armed and ready to go, or they've been drinking vodka, collecting paychecks and goofing off.

And think with a Patriot missile system in play for Ukraine now.. it may help negate the Nuclear Threat all but guaranteeing that this will be a non nuclear war!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,363
13,691
146
One exchange can do a lot more than 100 million.
Besides, Russia is proving that such peace was only temporary. MAD is not a permanent solution. The peace we enjoyed is going to come with a price that has yet to be paid. Nuclear proliferation would only accelerate us towards that end.
A few stable nations with nukes has created the longest stretch of world peace in recorded history, basically since the advent of organized religion. You're making an assumption that we'll eventually use those nukes, which may be the case. Either way the next actual world war, nukes or conventional, will obliterate modern society. We're too far extended to weather something like that without some severe upheaval.
 

Artorias

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2014
2,148
1,435
136
Let Ukraine be a lesson to all nations with nukes. If you don't want to get invaded you never give them up, an agreement between countries is not worth the paper they are written on, the only thing nations acknowledge and understand is military prowess.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
34,067
8,085
136
A few stable nations with nukes has created the longest stretch of world peace in recorded history

There are multiple aspects to unpack.
While that peace is true, it is not all encompassing. Been plenty of war and violence since WW2.
Yes, it is not to scale and has been somewhat contained thus far. The fleeting hope is it remains contained.

Invading Ukraine for Genocidal conquest and sending 10s of millions of refugees into NATO is going to put that to the test. Do we sit back and watch 44 million neighbors get slaughtered? Okay, so we (barely) arm them and watch them fight and die to fend of ethnic cleansing on our door step. A rather chicken !@#$ way of saying we're with you

But that peace is temporary. You said stable nations, but no nation will remain stable. You can claim victory of peace only for a duration, and while delusions may settle in while the peace holds, never forget what human nature actually is. Even if it takes a few hundred years, we are destined to break our bonds. Unstable nations will neither give up their nukes, nor handle them responsibly. Every nation is merely a matter of time before it reaches that stage. And irresponsible handling of nukes will see them used, one way or another.

Russia is already testing instability via threats of nuclear blackmail. Let them genocide 44 million people (to start) or else. That's a new level of nuclear depravity. It will get worse.

Beyond that, Russia has proven that anyone not holding nukes is fair game. This is a massive impetus for either joining NATO or nuclear proliferation. More nuclear weapons will be made to try and fend off the existing nuclear powers. Agreements clearly are not real, and this invasion even asks the question... would NATO defend itself and risk MAD? We clearly will not risk it for 44 million neighbors, and the only benefit Poland enjoys is... a piece of paper. Ukraine had one too. Why "end the world" and "commit suicide" over someone else?

Our policy is deeply flawed and contradictory. The only thing we can be certain of is this. Our world is becoming more dangerous, more nuclear, not less. To that end, I will ever condemn nuclear proliferation. While it has had some benefits, there will be a terrible price yet to be paid. And choosing which nations to save from genocide is not helping. It must be all nations. Or they will feel the need to go nuclear.
 

rommelrommel

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2002
4,411
3,192
146
What the fuck? Transnistria isn’t recognised as anything by anyone other than a part of Moldova that the Russians have made into a mess. What a shit article.
 

Pipeline 1010

Golden Member
Dec 2, 2005
1,960
782
136
I have serious doubts about COMPETENT MAINTENANCE by the Russkies on their nukes! Like are they truly armed and ready to go, or they've been drinking vodka, collecting paychecks and goofing off.

I don't think they are...at least their land based stuff. I believe they haven't been maintained and probably there have been parts sold on the black market. I'm not willing to bet humanity on it though. And all it takes to seriously ruin our day is 1 working nuke that gets through.

And I bet their sub launched nukes work just fine, although in my imagination/fantasies, we've got an attack sub or 2 shadowing each of those subs ready to bring them down in under 30s. Again, I'm not willing to bet humanity on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pmv

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,165
30,117
146
Let Ukraine be a lesson to all nations with nukes. If you don't want to get invaded you never give them up, an agreement between countries is not worth the paper they are written on, the only thing nations acknowledge and understand is military prowess.

OR, the rest of the world just learns not to trust cultures that have an, uh, documented, uninterrupted, 2 thousand year model of totalitarian monarchist fascism. Many world wars were fought against that specific idea: two of them named, and the rest of them proxies for the same by their uh, general "flavor." Everyone fucking else "got it" after the last 2k years.

literally everyone.

Except One. Except fucking one remaining despotic piece of shit criminal culture. Only one out of all truly remains. And we know what they smell like.

It's the same shit, always: Defeat the Fascist Asshole. Defeat them all. We don't end this, ever, until all of these pieces of shit are wiped out.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
24,030
13,539
136
OR, the rest of the world just learns not to trust cultures that have an, uh, documented, uninterrupted, 2 thousand year model of totalitarian monarchist fascism. Many world wars were fought against that specific idea: two of them named, and the rest of them proxies for the same by their uh, general "flavor." Everyone fucking else "got it" after the last 2k years.

literally everyone.

Except One. Except fucking one remaining despotic piece of shit criminal culture. Only one out of all truly remains. And we know what they smell like.

It's the same shit, always: Defeat the Fascist Asshole. Defeat them all. We don't end this, ever, until all of these pieces of shit are wiped out.

100% this. There will never be peace. Free folk will always be a threat to regimes that suppresses its own people. It will *never* end.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,363
13,691
146
There are multiple aspects to unpack.
While that peace is true, it is not all encompassing. Been plenty of war and violence since WW2.
Yes, it is not to scale and has been somewhat contained thus far. The fleeting hope is it remains contained.

Invading Ukraine for Genocidal conquest and sending 10s of millions of refugees into NATO is going to put that to the test. Do we sit back and watch 44 million neighbors get slaughtered? Okay, so we (barely) arm them and watch them fight and die to fend of ethnic cleansing on our door step. A rather chicken !@#$ way of saying we're with you

But that peace is temporary. You said stable nations, but no nation will remain stable. You can claim victory of peace only for a duration, and while delusions may settle in while the peace holds, never forget what human nature actually is. Even if it takes a few hundred years, we are destined to break our bonds. Unstable nations will neither give up their nukes, nor handle them responsibly. Every nation is merely a matter of time before it reaches that stage. And irresponsible handling of nukes will see them used, one way or another.

Russia is already testing instability via threats of nuclear blackmail. Let them genocide 44 million people (to start) or else. That's a new level of nuclear depravity. It will get worse.

Beyond that, Russia has proven that anyone not holding nukes is fair game. This is a massive impetus for either joining NATO or nuclear proliferation. More nuclear weapons will be made to try and fend off the existing nuclear powers. Agreements clearly are not real, and this invasion even asks the question... would NATO defend itself and risk MAD? We clearly will not risk it for 44 million neighbors, and the only benefit Poland enjoys is... a piece of paper. Ukraine had one too. Why "end the world" and "commit suicide" over someone else?

Our policy is deeply flawed and contradictory. The only thing we can be certain of is this. Our world is becoming more dangerous, more nuclear, not less. To that end, I will ever condemn nuclear proliferation. While it has had some benefits, there will be a terrible price yet to be paid. And choosing which nations to save from genocide is not helping. It must be all nations. Or they will feel the need to go nuclear.
Look, I don't disagree with you on all points, just saying that without nukes we would have had at minimum two world powers with the largest armies equipped of all time with nothing to do, and borders to expand. All this shit is fuzzy, because human nature is fuzzy, and we're just doing the best we can while we can. Undoubtedly, if we haven't already, we'll develop some kind of perfect defense against delivery systems that will render them irrelevant, then we get to cross another bridge, but for now we've established what historically would be called a world peace, even if it isn't to isolated groups.

I do hope that the west continues to escalate in Ukraine, slow enough that Putin doesn't get an itchy trigger finger (the reasonable justification so far).