What's new

War

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
Interesting, in Germany we say, two flys with one hit. :)

I think the bridge is just damaged, maybe you are right with a 2nd strike?
Russia is paying attention to bridges etc now. it would take a strike from planes, or ground to ground missiles now. or...a submarine. does Ukraine even HAVE a submarine? maybe something similar to one of our old PT boats with torpedoes...those bridge columns are NOT gonna change direction trying to dodge, lol.
 

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
Putin is whining about a "terrorist attack" by Ukraine Special Services on the Kerch Strait bridge. probably looking at the right suspects, but...isn't he the one that launched this war ? is it not Russian missiles hitting schools/hospitals/train stations? are those valid military targets (along with the civilians inside) but the bridge you damaged trying to keep your attackers short on supplies & reinforcements is somehow sacred & you ought not attack it? those Ukrainians are such MEANIES! :mad::smoke:
 

Ca++

Well-known member
The media has said the Ukraine has no subs a few times. However.. An odd canoe like thing washed up in the Crimea a bit back. The ruskies towed it out and blew it up. Reports said it had cameras on the front and a small periscope in the middle. Periscope suggests this was like a narco sub. Unmanned though.

Another report showed a full on launcher sat in a boat it filled. While another has then making drones on the front line. The Ukraine has blacksmiths as well as techs that know enough to make things work. I don't see why a small semi-submersible couldn't launch quite a bang. There is plenty of kit left on the battlefield to cannabalise
 

audiohi

Well-known member
Veteran
I'm pretty sure that we gave them MARTAC T38's at the very least

T38-Loaded-Underway.png.webp
 

Hermanthegerman

Peri alypias
Veteran
On the often seen video with the bridge, is just a bridge for tourists and pedestrians, but maybe its a part of the ukrainian Ho Chi Min Trail? :)

 

mean mr.mustard

I Pass Satellites
Veteran
I imagine that they would tear through troops like butter.

I thought that shotguns and the like were banned in warfare.

I am pretty sure we used flechette rounds in Vietnam and so I assume that I just have my Geneva Convention confused.

Anyway between the tungsten shot and blast wave that weapon is devastating to meat based targets.
 

Ca++

Well-known member
This 50 mile limit on the range of weapons we give them, isn't enough to match the behaviour of Russia. If Russia can fire into the Ukraine hundreds of miles, we should really give the Ukraine similar. If we limit what they have, it's like we are controlling the war. We are not meant to be. We should just be giving what they ask for. Because they asked. Not because we were controlling the theater. Further to this, if the Ukraine are made to promise they won't fire over the boarder, then this will not end until Russia decide. Everything being destroyed is in Ukrainian. The Russians could simply pull out and sit on the boarder making that area unlivable. While not being touched.

We should be leveling them up. A clear message that hitting towns well outside the war zone isn't viable. A clear sign that Russia bring the war, and the Ukraine match it. So this long range civilian stuff isn't without risk. That a nuclear device leads to a nuclear device. It's the deterrent game. They need long range, and I see no reason to be holding back. We should explain this to Russia, and get on with it. Match fire with fire, and this civilian escalation will cease. Or Putin commits suicide. I don't think he will. However, keep that shit over their. They are not a NATO country. If Putin drops one, we shouldn't attack his fleet. That is us at war for a non-member. We let the Ukraine attack his fleet.

Right now, we are giving this stuff, but in return put limits on their activities. Even with their own stuff. It's not right. We are prolonging the war, when a little escalation might wake up the Russian people. Nothing the Russians have not done already. That is the limit we should impose. This has gone on long enough to know it's not decisive enough.
 

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
Russians could simply pull out and sit on the boarder making that area unlivable. While not being touched.
they could render the entire country unlivable just by launching missiles, either ground to ground or air-launched cruise missiles, or offshore from ships. i've been wondering about this scenario as well. sure looks like we are keeping Ukraine in the fight, but only allowing them to try to repel Russia back to their border but not hit Russian supply bases/weapons depots inside of Russia to aid their cause...i always figured that if someone was shooting at me, it was only fair to shoot back at him regardless of where he was. there are no safe zones in war.
 

audiohi

Well-known member
Veteran

‘Enough is enough’: Dems rage at Saudis over oil cut, vow to block weapons sales​

The message comes from Senate Foreign Relations Chair Bob Menendez, who has veto power over foreign arms sales.​
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/...r-oil-cut-vow-to-block-weapons-sales-00061123

“As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I will not green light any cooperation with Riyadh until the Kingdom reassesses its position with respect to the war in Ukraine,” Menendez said in a statement first obtained by POLITICO. “Enough is enough.”

“From unanswered questions about 9/11, the brutal murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and the exporting of extremism, to dubious jailing of peaceful dissidents and conspiring with Vladimir Putin to punish the U.S. with higher oil prices, the Saudi royal family has never been a trustworthy ally of our nation,” Durbin said. “It’s time for our foreign policy to imagine a world without this alliance with these royal backstabbers.”
 

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
the problem with the US getting pissy and not selling them weapons is that they don't GAFF who they buy munitions off of. they cut output to help prop Russia up to continue acting as a counter-balance against overly pushy US actions/influence. keeping a second Big Gun active in the area is to their liking. cutting OUR sales to them means MORE Saudi money in Putins pocket to go with the increased profit from their oil sales. if Russia is short on something the House of Saud wants, i'm sure China probably has a suitable replacement on hand.
 

mean mr.mustard

I Pass Satellites
Veteran
the problem with the US getting pissy and not selling them weapons is that they don't GAFF who they buy munitions off of. they cut output to help prop Russia up to continue acting as a counter-balance against overly pushy US actions/influence. keeping a second Big Gun active in the area is to their liking. cutting OUR sales to them means MORE Saudi money in Putins pocket to go with the increased profit from their oil sales. if Russia is short on something the House of Saud wants, i'm sure China probably has a suitable replacement on hand.

We sold the Saudis a bunch of weapons already back when Trump was in office right?

Or was this from then? Or again? I know we've done business with them plenty but I am just a little foggy.

It sucks to see us still so dependent on oil.

I thought we would at least have hydrogen figured out by now.
 

mean mr.mustard

I Pass Satellites
Veteran
Is that drill baby drill still on?

How much is left in Alaska?

Is the Gulf still lucrative?

Can we get hydrogen already?

I thought we would have Jetson cars and transportation tubes at least by now.

We're still burning limited resources by the fuckton... And shipping them back out... burning more oil.

At least tank armor has come a long way.
 

Ca++

Well-known member
Yeah it's pretty terrible that Putin's missiles hit civilian areas.

He must be pretty pissed about that bridge.

Or maybe they can't aim.

Either way it's terrible.
The cruise missiles are not bad. In the capital is a glass bridge, and it was caught in a blast. The significance can't be ignored.
They do need co-ordinates to hit though. The speed they come in at, doesn't allow for camera based corrections.
It's entirely possible that all they aimed at was the bridge though, and what we see as a hits across distracts, is actually accuracy issues. One landed in the middle of an large road junction, which is probably filled by now. It's not a target you would pick to make a show.

Many of these missiles fly fast enough to evade most track and destroy type weaponry. Covering the 25 miles range of some decent systems, so fast they barely have time to look up. So it's hard to stop them. However, if you launch one and want to steer it, it's also very difficult.
 

audiohi

Well-known member
Veteran
the problem with the US getting pissy and not selling them weapons is that they don't GAFF who they buy munitions off of. they cut output to help prop Russia up to continue acting as a counter-balance against overly pushy US actions/influence. keeping a second Big Gun active in the area is to their liking. cutting OUR sales to them means MORE Saudi money in Putins pocket to go with the increased profit from their oil sales. if Russia is short on something the House of Saud wants, i'm sure China probably has a suitable replacement on hand.

Russia has nothing for the Saudis. Russia is buying from North Korea and Iran.

The second we stop providing patriot missiles and the Houthis start firing rockets, the Saudi's will find out.

It's easy to forget who actually protects that oil they sell.
 

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top