What's new

Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments PART 2

Lavrov losing his cool - again ...


Moscow will regard F-16 donation as 'nuclear' threat​



Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said Moscow will regard Western F-16 fighter jets sent to Ukraine as a “nuclear” threat because of their capacity to carry atomic weapons.
The F-16 can fly more than 500 miles and deliver its weapons with superior accuracy

1692555295691.jpeg


>> remind how how many times has russia drawn a red line - only to wipe it out and then draw another new one ?!
 
Last edited:
The war will go into 2024, and most likely 2025 for sure. The F16s will help during offensives in 2024 for sure and the longer this was goes on, the harder it will become for Russia. That is probably the point of the staggered release of weapons.
Yes this war can be very long. The Russians want to keep the territory they haven stolen.
Ukraine can make the lives of Russian invaders to hell.
the Russians can’t sustain this war forever. The war costs Russia 1 billion dollar per day. That’s about the entire export earnings of Russia per day. Imagine, they stop eating to finance the war. Russia finances the war with debts because Russia export earnings declining far exceeding the costs.
At some point all money reserves running out, debts hitting the ceiling, Russian people revolt because they are hungry.
 
Lavrov losing his cool - again ...




View attachment 947289

>> remund how how many times has russia drawn a red line - only to wipe it out and then draw another new one ?!

Russia red lines are a joke.

No one takes them seriously.

Russian weapons are duds.
 
Who tf said it would be fun? You really go on wild tangents with your own imaginations and strawmen.

Russia also has mountains similar to Rockies. No one would want to live in a post nuclear wasteland with no luxuries of the modern world and die from simple medical issues due to lack of services and the entire network of society. My post never mentioned such nonsense you wrote entire essay about.

Quite simply, Russia may consider it a more favorable exchange given it is so, so much larger than Europe. Russia can nuke every inch of Europe 5 times over then if US can nuke Russia's every inch with spare change. You must therefore also remember that Russia can nuke every inch of US with change left over. If Russian leaders do push for that for whatever insane hypothetical reasons, they may think to themselves that they can better survive.

In fact nuclear war isn't quite as destructive as Cold War made it out.

This is why both US and USSR had over 5000 warheads each during height. The actual main destructive zone (wiping out buildings etc) of typical 100KT yield warheads isn't quite as large as people think. 100KT can NOT even cover all of Sydney depending how you define fallout. In core destructive zones (the first two circles) it is about enough to take out Sydney's CBD.

3000 warheads averaging 100KT each isn't enough to truly "destroy" Russia completely even if by area the total spread of effect of those totals exceed Russia's landmass. In a nuclear showdown, Russia indeed IS absolutely the "best" to survive especially if their elites consider their bunkers more than enough to last several years in before coming out of. I hope they aren't that crazy and naive though.

On "survival" we agree. It is not the kind of world a person used to modernity would want to live in. But in such a case, Europe and US would be completely gone if Russia has even 70% of NATO's total yield since Russia is > 1/0.7*NATO



Yeah. But what if those Russian elites have built bunkers in those Siberian mountain regions? Maybe they might have a small tiny microscopic change of thinking that it is favorable to wipe out US and Europe and survive in that way. Nuclear fallout lasts several years but contaminated materials need cleanup. It is just that they may hide in vast Siberia and come out of bunkers years after fallout goes away and radiation subsides. Hiroshima and Nagasaki's fallout only lasted several years. Sure I know there is clean up required and many other things like total yield and dirt in atmosphere. But we should also remember that the whole theory of nuclear winter has recently been shown to be nowhere near a certainty. There may be no such thing as 10,000 warheads going off everywhere around all at once, causing so much dust in atmosphere.

Nukes are much less destructive than Cold War mentality made it out to be due to propaganda by both sides.

Unless we're all building 10MT yield warheads which we know isn't the case for either US or Russia since both hold a lot of tactical yield sized nukes and typically have 100KT ranged main warheads with MIRV missiles.

I will put this in simplest terms. The world (nuclear) war will destroy human civilizations as we know it. Imagine your life without industry, safety, medical facilities, and living standards. Radiation will be another issue to deal with. There is no need to drop a bomb on every sector to ruin a country or even continents.

But let's focus on Russia vs USA situation for now. Russian population base is small and concentrated in some locations that can be wiped out rather easily. People in remote areas might survive at most. US has a much higher count of towns and cities and no shortage of remote areas either. American military is also present in the entire world, this is by design. American military can come together to re-create US in safer lands. Maybe wipe out some countries and steal their lands in the process too. American security regime talks less about how it will carry out a nuclear war but it is much better prepared than it seems to be. US spends so much on its security regime, this amounts to something.

But this is off-topic discussion. This thread is about Ukraine, and I think that Lavrov's statement has been taken out of context.
 
Can't wait to see F16 armed with amraams taking out Russian trash from Ukrainian skies and russian soldiers getting GBUed.

It's very, very, very important to make a distinction between AMRAAM-D and other modifications. AMRAAM-D is the first missile which outranges a contemporary Russian fighter radar. And it has home-on-jam mode, which will be very handy too.
 
I will put this in simplest terms. The world (nuclear) war will destroy human civilizations as we know it. Imagine your life without industry, safety, medical facilities, and living standards. Radiation will be another issue to deal with. There is no need to drop a bomb on every sector to ruin a country or even continents.

But let's focus on Russia vs USA situation for now. Russian population base is small and concentrated in some locations that can be wiped out rather easily. People in remote areas might survive at most. US has a much higher count of towns and cities and no shortage of remote areas either. American military is also present in the entire world, this is by design. American military can come together to re-create US in safer lands. Maybe wipe out some countries and steal their lands in the process too. American security regime talks less about how it will carry out a nuclear war but it is much better prepared than it seems to be. US spends so much on its security regime, this amounts to something.

But this is off-topic discussion. This thread is about Ukraine, and I think that Lavrov's statement has been taken out of context.

I think the discourse is very much warranted here, but the conclusion is very obvious:

NATO is 1 billion people, more than a half or world economy, and an industrial capacity far bigger than that of China and Russia, if all NATO economies combined.

Full scale nuclear exchange, worst case scenario: NATO loses 5% of population, few large cities, and few large military/political centres; Russia — Moscow destroyed, and political system wiped.

Russia is an extremely centralised country, like China was before 199X. Everything is in Moscow there. Pigozin just showed how much the country can be paralysed if the central government runs away on a doomsday plane just for a few hours.

Russian organised first strike is at most 800 warheads, which means at most 200 major targets. it was never bigger than 3000 at the height of the cold war simply for the sheer logistic difficulties, and physics.

If US not been lying on START talks, then it's current first strike is half of Russia's, but it has much bigger second strike because it has more submarines.

And if you add UK, and France, there is really nothing to talk about.
 
Last edited:
I think the discourse is very much warranted here, but the conclusion is very obvious:

NATO is 1 billion people, more than a half or world economy, and an industrial capacity far bigger than that of China's, if all NATO industries combined.

Full scale nuclear exchange, worst case scenario: NATO loses 5% of population, few large cities, and few large military/political centres; Russia — Moscow destroyed, and political system wiped.

Russia is an extremely centralised country, like China was before 199X. Everything is in Moscow there. Pigozin just showed how much the country can be paralysed if the central government runs away on a doomsday plane just for a few hours.
Yeah, I guess no.

Sapir-45.jpg


The war will go into 2024, and most likely 2025 for sure. The F16s will help during offensives in 2024 for sure and the longer this was goes on, the harder it will become for Russia. That is probably the point of the staggered release of weapons.
To the last Ukrainian, If they want to fight in 2025 I guess they will have to start rounding up Ukrainians from Polish cities, because looking at streets I have the feeling that there are now more Young Ukrainians males in Poland than in Ukraine.
 
I think the discourse is very much warranted here, but the conclusion is very obvious:

NATO is 1 billion people, more than a half or world economy, and an industrial capacity far bigger than that of China and Russia, if all NATO economies combined.

Full scale nuclear exchange, worst case scenario: NATO loses 5% of population, few large cities, and few large military/political centres; Russia — Moscow destroyed, and political system wiped.

Russia is an extremely centralised country, like China was before 199X. Everything is in Moscow there. Pigozin just showed how much the country can be paralysed if the central government runs away on a doomsday plane just for a few hours.

Russian organised first strike is at most 800 warheads, which means at most 200 major targets. it was never bigger than 3000 at the height of the cold war simply for the sheer logistic difficulties, and physics.

If US not been lying on START talks, then it's current first strike is half of Russia's, but it has much bigger second strike because it has more submarines.

And if you add UK, and France, there is really nothing to talk about.

American nukes are very accurate and optimized to defeat underground infrastructure - very lethal due to this reason. US has a potent first strike capability and even more potent second strike capability.

A chunk of Russian nukes are inaccurate and it is unclear how many missiles will work. Total number of nukes sounds great in theory but a nuclear war has many variables as well. It comes down to planning and how impactful strikes will be. Time is of the essence as well. Some of the American security officials have said on record that US has technological surprises up its sleeve. People will see.

People think that nuclear war with US is fun? Get your head examined.

Russia with its limited budget and small population base cannot defeat US in a war. Any type of war. Russia can attack and destroy parts of US mainland but it cannot eliminate American security regime because of its global footprint and robust infrastructure. Security regime is the key to recreating society if necessary.

Still, nuclear war is a horrible development. Let's hope that it does not happen.
 
To the last Ukrainian, If they want to fight in 2025 I guess they will have to start rounding up Ukrainians from Polish cities, because looking at streets I have the feeling that there are now more Young Ukrainians males in Poland than in Ukraine.

Wars go on for years, if not decades. This one is still in its infancy - i dont understand why all the russian supporters want it to end so soon ???
 
Wars go on for years, if not decades. This one is still in its infancy - i dont understand why all the russian supporters want it to end so soon ???

Because they can't take it anymore seeing their "world's second most powerful army that could capture gay Europe within 48 hours" getting roasted in Ukraine.

Obviously after you've been fed about this fact for years and seeing the reality about "Russia's power" is very hard to swallow, it has to stop.

At least they gave up the "real russian army is at home waiting for NATO, Russians only sent their second tier army".
 

Tu-22 Backfire Destroyed In Drone Strike Deep Inside Russia​



Following interesting comment from the link - Quite funny!!

Zonker Harris

Cope cages for the TU-22M's are going to be the next thing.
 
Because they can't take it anymore seeing their "world's second most powerful army that could capture gay Europe within 48 hours" getting roasted in Ukraine.

Obviously after you've been fed about this fact for years and seeing the reality about "Russia's power" is very hard to swallow, it has to stop.

At least they gave up the "real russian army is at home waiting for NATO, Russians only sent their second tier army".

Totally agree !!

The best thing that can happen to Russia right now - is a quick decisive defeat by Ukraine so that they can pack their bags and go home from all the occupied terrorities, so that they can lick their wounds and work out what went wrong and attempt to regroup and shake off the sanctions. Russian's really want/need to be put out of their misery ... but that relief is not going to be coming for them.

The "worst thing" for Russia is for this war to drag on for years and years, destroying the very fabric of what is left of their military, the destruction of the reputation of their military industrial complex that itself will undermine their future military strength, and being forced to face ongoing sanctions that are sapping the economic strength of Russia and the future evolution of its economy. Russia will miss out on the next industrial revolution, ie AI as it under so many economic and technology sanctions, that it has been currently forced to harvest cpu's from washing machines to put into their missiles let alone be able to purchase large number of nvdia AI chips for which there is a global bidding war going on right now !!

Russia is being slowly and progressively de-integrated from the next age of our future ...

This war is the perfect opportunity for the complete systemmatic de-construction of Russia and its ability to be a global menace ... if people think the americans/west are gonna let the russians get off easily - then they have another thing coming..
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom