Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments PART 2

[jhungary]

depend on how Ukraine play it , but you mentioned good point Russia probably must provide for those civilian too and that made it harder. bad part for Ukraine is that probably the electricity in those area provided by nuclear power plants so they can't attack them , but in retaliation they can attack control centers in electricity grid of those areas , that also have the same effect , at least I'd have been done so

Again, Electricity playbook has not been used since 1970.

Case in point, the "Heavy Missile strike" on Ukraine 2 days ago have brought power down for Ukrainian, for exactly 14 hours according to my friend who live in Kyiv.

It changes nothing on ground, in fact, they took 3 more village and press closer to Svatove on the ground to now within 13 km (It was 20 km before). I mean, if you want to waste your precious ammo and drone on civilian infrastructure, that's up to you, but that's how people lose war. And Ukraine will gladly for you to bomb civilian power station or distribution hub.

Getting more veterans with combat experience does help

The thing is, Ukraine did have a lot of vet with combat experience.

In Ukraine, you are put into reserve for 4 years after you served 2 years in Donbas, which was an active warzone before Feb 2022. And that lasted for 8 years, and then the conventional campaign back in 2014 lasted for 6 months.

In a way, Ukrainian military probably have more experience on how to fight a conventional war than any of the NATO military combine, because NATO had not seen 1 since 1970 (Or 1982 if you are British). It's one thing to fight in Afghanistan and playing whack-a-mole hunt, another to fight toe to toe with some country in a set piece.

 

[Paul2]

The thing is, Ukraine did have a lot of vet with combat experience.

What I mean... getting more vets for NATO, and exactly for reasons you mentioned

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1579953958600470528

https://twitter.com/x/status/1579956712215568386

https://twitter.com/x/status/1579954527121600512

What I mean... getting more vets for NATO, and exactly for reasons you mentioned

NATO men are cowards.

 

[jhungary]

What I mean... getting more vets for NATO, and exactly for reasons aforementioned

Well, that depends.

If the experience are solely what you are looking at, yes, but at command level (You are talking about NATO command authorise NATO boot on the ground, not individual soldier or even country sent the troop to Ukraine) Then no.

NATO command would want to have maximum their skill set at a wide board of issue, it means unless you are sending the entire NATO task force, which NATO operate as a group to Ukraine, that's the only way NATO command would have gain experience from. Otherwise, what NATO would gain from is to how to fight a war in Ukraine using Ukrainian equipment and resource, and NATO will NEVER fight a war with Ukrainian equipment and resource.

For NATO command, the exact thing they wanted is what they are doing now, have a NATO compatible troop using NATO equipment to fight a Third Country adversary. Because that would be able to test their doctrine and training, which is what NATO command would be looking for. Which mean sending NATO troop on the ground is redundant because Ukrainian, for all intend and purposes, are NATO troop.

On the other hand, if you are talking about individual level, as in individual who never been to a conventional war want to see how it looks like, then yes, that would have been a Unique experience, in fact, if I was 10 years younger, I would probably would already there fighting.

 

[jhungary]

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Russia is essentially fukked. They only thing they can do is lob missiles at ukrainians and hope they call it quit.

LOL can't wait for the baby rapists apologists here to take a massive L when Ukraine win the war & take back Crimea.

 

[Oldman1]

@Oldman1

I know it is wishful thinking, but what if Ukraine have this??

Any 8x8s that can be provided besides that Stryker with the 105 gun? Or maybe Marine Corp's LAVs? Don't know if we have any in storage of old LAVs or something similar.

Think the Dutch, the Dane, Spanish, Portugese, Australian, and American already gave them 400 M113 to Ukraine. IIRC. That's probably enough for now. That's like 3 division worth of M113...I mean even Australia and Canada do not have that number in service...

I know we are replacing the M113s with the new model I believe it is already in production. Israel who may not provide weaponry have thousands of M113s with upgraded armor which are being replace with Namers.

 

[Oldman1]

despite Russia recent shock and awe strategy still there is one way for Ukraine to win and that is to tolerate these attacks Russia stock of cruise missile and guided weapon unlike their artillery is limited .they need tolerate this phase of war and attack Russians supply lines and weapon storage for now. Russia can bring as many as it want without those supply lines it only make their work harder. but its the only way specially , soon the Russians will face the problem they had 5 month ago rain , winter cold and no supply and this time they had to provide 300,000 more
if they want to win they must be patient and try not to rush and specially try not to loose their allies by their comments and constantly asking for more to attack inside Russia , that only unite Russians

There are mobilize reservists already on the frontlines and are getting killed or captured after just being on the frontlines for few days or weeks. Not even being trained enough or troops being disorganized and just milling around. Not to mention as you said not being well equipped.

 

[925boy]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1579877907136385024

https://twitter.com/x/status/1579869343550427136

But Mr @jhungary has been on this thread this whole time telling us that "US/NATO isnt involved in this war" - well if they're not involved then how can Ukraine losing be a loss for NATO/US?

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1579975625166970880

 

[Oldman1]

But Mr @jhungary has been on this thread this whole time telling us that "US/NATO isnt involved in this war" - well if they're not involved then how can Ukraine losing be a loss for NATO/US?

Because Russia would be next door to NATO like Poland along with Belarus next to the Baltics. Their next target.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1579972635869728769

https://twitter.com/x/status/1579961699343663105

https://twitter.com/x/status/1579762750305492993

 

[925boy]

There are mobilize reservists already on the frontlines and are getting killed or captured after just being on the frontlines for few days or weeks.

but Ukranians are dying also on the frontlines, AT THE SAME or higher rate than Russian casaulties, so why arent you asking Ukraine not to send those soldiers there? Russian artillery MOWED DOWN soo many Ukranian soldiers during the attack on Kharkiv and Kherson, its not even funny, Ukraine lost low to mid xx,xxx of troops easily in those stupid pushes that didnt b ring much territoryt gfain and evaporated Ukraine's best soldiers...now just wait for those 300K+ soldiers arriving in Ukraine gradually due to mobilization.

NATO LOGIC- "we lost in Afghanistan, but that doesnt mean we cant win against RUssia in Ukraine".
lmaooo

Not even being trained enough or troops being disorganized and just milling around.

how do you know that? you also dont know their strategy- they will probably hold the rear bases and territories, to free up bettter troops to go on the attack and take more Ukranian territory. dont speak on what you have no or poor knowledge about , for real.

Not to mention as you said not being well equipped.

and NATO's bich asz still cant move in and fight them? then i guess equipment doesnt matter then!

 

[jhungary]

But Mr @jhungary has been on this thread this whole time telling us that "US/NATO isnt involved in this war" - well if they're not involved then how can Ukraine losing be a loss for NATO/US?

Are you seriously that dumb not to figure out Jens Stoltenberg meant the People of the Freeworld, or "the West" collectively. Not all the country in the west are US and NATO, hell, not all of Europe are NATO.

Please don't tell me you are this dumb, because at least I use to think you are at least normal.

 

[925boy]

What use would Putin puppet Lukashenko's army be against Ukraine?

Alexander Lukashenko has announced he is deploying units to the Ukraine border and carrying out 'combat readiness' checks, hinting he may join the fighting against Kyiv.

www.dailymail.co.uk

>> Honestly - if Belarus joins the war - it will be a favour to Ukraine as Ukraine will walk all over Belarus and will remove the ability of Russia to use Belarus to launch strikes against Ukraine..

so can i understand your point right here : - are you saying that Ukraine that couldnt take out Crimea bridge in all actuality can take out BElarus? ha ha ha ......i have a serious quewstion - why are NATO troops afraid to enter Belarus? i can sense their apprehension.