What's new

Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well the problem with besieging a city is you have to have your forces all spread out around the city, it's not like a medieval castle or something like the Alamo where it only takes a few thousand troops and surround it on all sides. Cutting power and water is one way to do it. But as you have seen, the Russian forces are having a hard time just going around because there are Ukrainian units waiting for them there. And they can resupply and repair. I mean just look at Starlink satellites, try to cut off the internet, Ukrainians have satellite access internet. Who knows what else they can do...
You don't need to do that . You need several drones.
 
Russia annexes Crimea,invades and funds terrorists in eastern Ukraine yet ask why Ukraine is looking westward and do not trust the Russians anymore. :)



Sorry for forgetting once :rolleyes:
Terrorists ? Interesting in western Ukraine the only terrorist I see is the ones who for seven year shelled villages and killed 14000 civilians
 
Despite numerous discussions - The Hungarians have signed a decree refusing lethal aid shipments into Ukraine to pass through the Hungarian Border.


---
Russia will STOP invasion if Ukraine agrees to the following demands:
- Constitutional amendment ruling out membership of any blocs (NATO)
- Ukraine must recognise CRIMEA as Russian and Donetsk and Lugansk as Independent states.
Source: AP Wire
---
Pakistan's opposition leaders have labelled IK's statements re EU diplomats as "Dangerous"
---
Human traffickers are targeting Ukrainian women and children arriving in Berlin, pretending to offer them shelter. Source: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-n...-exploit-ukrainian-refugees-dark-side-exodus/
---
Ukraine FM confirmed that shipments of arms and ammunition are flowing into the country:
Source: Visegrad24
---
Former Ukranian President Yanukovych arrived in Minsk
View attachment 821635

---
Second round of talks between Russia and Ukraine end with no cease fire:
---
European markets eager for diplomatic solution with Russia. - Source: RationalFX

---
Ukraine's president seeks international trade embargo on Russia:
So Russia does not want the de-weaponization and de-nazification anymore?! With a little bit more time, Putin may just want some assurances against Ukranians joining NATO :laugh:
 
If I count the number of destroyed planes, helicopters, tanks and cars mentioned in Vergennes, Raptor22, Messerschmiit's posts, they are probably more than the Russian have total in their inventory, :- D



Dude, the diesel prices have jumped to 2 EUR a liter in Germany, gas prices have reached their historical highs. The whole auto industry is in freefall because Aluminum, wood and other raw material is not coming from Russia. The DAX has lost about 2000 points in the past week.

Inflation jumps up whenever a slight price hike comes in the oil/gas prices and here we are talking about historical hikes.

And you think it will not impact the EU economy? The biggest economy in EU completely disagrees.
The biggest problem for EU economy will be high energy prices and hopefully it will make Germany restart those nuclear plants and coal plants. Some prices will rise, and people will deal with it.

Even if you are right, and the economy crashes. it will pale in significant to what would happen if Russian army came to the German border or any border. Or if the Russians actually occupy some European country.

I have no doubt europeans would rather eat grass than be occupied by Russia. Because if Russia takes over we will be eating dirt, which is a lot worse than grass.

So russia will be stopped here and the price to make that happen can be any price. It does not matter.
 
What percentage of GDP of EU is made up of trade with Russia? very very small. Its like 174 billion Euro? out of a 15 trillion economy. My maths says that less than 1% of the GDP. Less than a fraction of 1% of EU economy.

EU will be fine.
You think I was talking about trade? Man you people just don’t get it. Just watch how soaring energy and food costs that are coming will wreck the cost of living among the European middle class. Governments will not be able to reduce interest rates further either because inflation will be so high. How do you think all this will impact the expensive social safety nets that European countries boast about?
 
American tanks are more well protected than Russian ones but also weak at the top, on the sides, from the back. I think they may fare a bit better but against Ukraine, not so much.

There is no comparison between Ukraine and Iraq. USA operated with air superiority and bombed those Iraqi cities and spared more resources to help ground forces. They can afford to in a way Russia simply cannot.

It's like asking a poor country to spend the same amount on an item as a rich country and purchase many thousands of that item for let's say a public good. The poor country realistically cannot afford to and must settle for cheaper item. The "cost" of that cheaper item is lower serviceability but that is the nature of being poorer. Russia cannot afford to shell this building because there is suspicious movement and activity within. USA bombed and shelled more liberally than Russia has for multiple reasons. Same for APS. Russia has APS but cannot afford to put them on every tank.

If it was USA in Russia's boots now but operating as USA, if they didn't bomb and shell any more than Russia has, I think their losses may not be so much better. Who knows. US tanks are better armored but a modern ATGM will go through M1A2's top, side, back armor just as much as it would a T-72. From the front and angled frontal shots, the M1 is a lot better. Then there are the APS systems and superior infantry equipment to support operations and to provide better situational awareness.

No doubt Russia is not as well equipped or anywhere near as rich. They prefer some old brute force military doctrines but I don't think US in that position would fare that much better. Iraq bombarded and shelled is not the same as Ukraine that has been less shelled and bombed than US preliminary strikes on Iraq.

I think Ukraine has always been considerably stronger than Iraq.
My friend,

I am not asserting that American tanks are impenetrable - I am simply pointing out that they are much better protected than Russian tanks.

For perspective:

Tank-armor1.jpg

Source: CIA records (declassified)

NOTE: M1 Armor Protection figures are BASELINE (without ERA tiles)

T-90-tank-fprado.png

Source: fprado

M1-A2-tank-fprado.png

Source: fprado

NOTE: M1 Armor Protection figures are BASELINE (without ERA tiles)

- - -

M1 Abrams tanks can also be equipped with ERA tiles:


- - -

M1 Abrams tanks received TUSK modifications for urban warfare:


- - -

M1 Abrams tanks also received Trophy APS to counter ATGMs:



- - -

To say that American tanks may fare a bit better than Russian tanks is gross understatement.

M1 Abrams + TUSK + ERA tiles + Trophy APS = well-equipped for ATGMs and urban warfare in general.

- - -

There is no comparison between Ukraine and Iraq? According to what parameters? Ukraine isn't a military juggernaut.

Both Iraq and Syria presented considerable urban warfare challenges to invading forces. Iraqi insurgents used a combination of RPGs, IEDs and traps to confront American tanks in cities. ISIS introduced ATGMs and UAVs in the mix in later years. Insurgents use buildings for cover and to take up positions from where they can get good shot(s) at invading forces on the streets. Insurgents can subject a tank to a volley of RPGs from different directions.

If you think that ATGMs are deadly then you should check footage of Iraqi IEDs and how these items were used to devastating effect in different environments. IEDs claimed highest number of American lives across Iraq - imagine this.


Urban warfare can become messy and deadly anywhere in the world. Never assume otherwise.

Fallujah is a good example of how brutal urban warfare can become when insurgents have sufficient time to prepare and fortify the city. The battle in Fallujah reached the point of house-to-house fighting and the city could be cleared in two separate attempts (Operation Vigilant Resolve; Operation Phantom Fury). When the battle concluded, over 70% of the infrastructure of the city was in ruins.

- - -

How Russia can fight a war in conventional terms is inconsequential to how USA can fight a war in conventional terms when in the same boat. American forces have access to much superior technology and funding levels; Americans are much better equipped to fight conventional battles and/or execute Major Combat Operations accordingly.

The ongoing Russian military operation in Ukraine is largest in scale and scope since Afghanistan. Russian forces have suffered heavy losses in Ukraine in a span of only 11 days - this is due to substantial shortcomings in Russian technology and logistics in large part.

Now, let me clarify something:

Few countries have sufficient military strength and capacity to invade and occupy another country in modern times. Modern warfare methods and technologies increasingly favor the defending party in fact.

Russian military performance in Ukraine is indicative of the fact that how difficult it is to invade and occupy even a moderately large country in modern times. It is indicative of how other large armies in Asia will do on the ground when trying to invade and occupy another country.

USA is an outlier in this game.
 
What percentage of GDP of EU is made up of trade with Russia? very very small. Its like 174 billion Euro? out of a 15 trillion economy. My maths says that less than 1% of the GDP. Less than a fraction of 1% of EU economy.

EU will be fine.

To generate them GDP figures you need electricity and fuel.
 
I have no doubt europeans would rather eat grass than be occupied by Russia.
That is just a way to put words in order to show Defiance. After a few slaps everyone starts saying "yes sir"
"Won't bow down" happens in Disney Ducktails, movies and daily soaps.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom