***Russian - Ukraine War Tactical and Strategic Updates*** [Warning on OP]

7,701,820 Views | 48126 Replies | Last: 2 hrs ago by 74OA
Ulysses90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GAC06 said:

How would that have changed anything? We know Russia has nukes.
It would have convinced me that their arsenal was ready to be employed on short notice. Had Putin detonated a small nuke on the tip of a missile and a large nuke I would not harbor the suspicions that the corruption throughout the Putin government that siphoned off billions of rubles meant for maintenance and periodic component testing of the nuclear arsenal into the pockets of corrupt bureaucrats, Generals, and Colonels. It would also have scared off smaller countries from sending F-16s and MBTs to Ukraine for fear of being moved up on a list of retaliatory targets.

The cost of a couple of warheads from the hundreds that Russia had at the end of the Cold War would be very small compared to the signal that it would send. As pointed out today, the ICBM launched at Dnipro was a waste of money in terms of the damage that it inflicted but it sent a message.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

First ever use of an ICBM is supposed to be a proportional response to US giving permission to Ukraine to use longer range (but not intercontinental range) for strikes deeper inside Russia?

It's about all Russia can really do at this point. They've thrown every conventional weapon at Ukraine and are already striking deep in side Ukraine with foreign made arms.
GAC06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

First ever use of an ICBM is supposed to be a proportional response to US giving permission to Ukraine to use longer range (but not intercontinental range) for strikes deeper inside Russia?


It's not a proportional response, it's a scare tactic
jagvocate
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

First ever use of an ICBM is supposed to be a proportional response to US giving permission to Ukraine to use longer range (but not intercontinental range) for strikes deeper inside Russia?



No. It's calculated escalation, not meant to be proportional.

2wealfth Man
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I am dying to know what Ukraine hit with all of those Storm Shadows; it seems to have put Putin in a bit of a rage
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Russia's war economy has reached its limits. Time is not on Putin's side.

"On close examination of the evidence, however, the narrative that Russia has the resources to prevail if it so chooses does not hold. Signs that the official data masks severe economic strains brought on by both war and sanctions have become increasingly apparent. No matter how many workers it tries to shift to the defense industry, the Kremlin cannot expand production fast enough to replace weapons at the rate they are being lost on the battlefield."

Definitely worth taking the time to read: FUMES
mallen
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

From a PURELY pragmatic standpoint we have nothing further to gain. The Russian military has come out of this incredibly weakened, it has exposed deficiencies in both our and their weapon systems, we've seen new drone tactics that were sorely needing real world exposure and seen what other countries and proxies will use against the US Navy in the near future. The United States has nothing else to gain here and a lot to risk/lose. Time to end this and reduce those risks.
I think these statements are somewhat contradictory. You acknowledge that Russia has been severely weakened militarily (and I will add economically), yet you also seem to indicate that we have nothing further to gain which is making the erroneous assumption that Russia cannot be further weakened by continued US military support. We already know that the Russians are scraping the bottom of the barrel, employing military equipment that's been in storage for decades and calling on North Korea to supplement it's severely depleted troop count. It's economy is headed for collapse. Why give them room to breathe?

What we want to happen is for the iron grip Putin has on Russia to be eroded to the point of collapse and this won't happen without persistent resolve. And perhaps even more importantly, a weakened Russia is also a weakened China, North Korea, and Iran. We cannot view Russia as a singularity.

What do we truly have to risk/lose except allowing Russia to regroup and retool for a future incursion? Allow Ukraine to continue to deplete the Russian military and economy and thank God we don't have to sacrifice our own soldiers doing it. Only engage in peace talks if NATO membership can be guaranteed.
Who?mikejones!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I don't think putin is anywhere near that point and this conflict probably won't impact that.
mallen
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Surely closer to collapse than the Summer of 2023 Wagner coup attempt.
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GAC06 said:

aggiehawg said:

First ever use of an ICBM is supposed to be a proportional response to US giving permission to Ukraine to use longer range (but not intercontinental range) for strikes deeper inside Russia?


It's not a proportional response, it's a scare tactic
Putin's expansion of the war by introducing third country troops to the frontlines in the form of 10,000 regular North Korean Army soldiers is perhaps the single biggest escalation since the original Russian invasion.

Characterizing the subsequent authorization of limited strikes into Russia using US supplied weapons as commensurate is laughable. If anything, it is a minimum response, just short of doing nothing at all.

According to Putin and his sympathizers, anything that helps Ukraine to defend itself is escalatory.
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Just a reminder.

Russia is running out of stuff to shoot at Ukraine like they're running out of tanks.



Who?mikejones!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
74OA said:

GAC06 said:

aggiehawg said:

First ever use of an ICBM is supposed to be a proportional response to US giving permission to Ukraine to use longer range (but not intercontinental range) for strikes deeper inside Russia?


It's not a proportional response, it's a scare tactic
Putin's expansion of the war by introducing third country troops to the frontlines in the form of 10,000 regular North Korean Army soldiers is perhaps the single biggest escalation since the original Russian invasion.

Characterizing the subsequent authorization of limited strikes into Russia using US supplied weapons as commensurate is laughable. If anything, it is a minimum response, just short of doing nothing at all.

According to Putin and his sympathizers, anything that helps Ukraine to defend itself is escalatory.


But our soldiers are on the ground pushing the button, Sir.
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
In addition to steadily gutting the Russian army, Putin's war is also causing Russia's naval modernization program to flounder.

"The Russian Navy, though still a serious concern for NATO, shows signs of decline reminiscent of the 1990s. Expensive reconstruction projects are struggling. Efforts to revive major warships, like the nuclear-powered battle cruiser Admiral Nakhimov, seem driven more by national pride than strategic value."

FLEET
AtticusMatlock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Russia denying it was an ICBM. Saying it was a medium range ballistic missile.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AtticusMatlock said:

Russia denying it was an ICBM. Saying it was a medium range ballistic missile.
Wouldn't that still violate some arms treaty somewhere?
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Probably not. Even Iran launched ballistic missiles at American forces in Iraq after Solemani was killed.
JR_83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Could be a violation of the INF (?) treaty - the one where we took Pershing II and GLCMs off the table.
benchmark
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
74OA said:

According to Putin and his sympathizers, anything that helps Ukraine to defend itself is escalatory.
74OA is nails. ^
B-1 83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Slightly off topic, but I wonder if they've captured any NORKs?
marcel ledbetter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There was a video several days ago on Redditt that was interviewing a badly wounded Nork. I think he was captured. He said his unit was used as fodder and he laid injured in a ditch for a few days before he was found.
USAFAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
NORAD/USSPACECOM is/was able to determine missile types from heat signature moments after launch with the DSP system. I guess its USSPACE Force now doing it. Point being, Pentagon knows what was launched.

12thFan/Websider Since 2003
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Pentagon was also notified before it was launched
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tucker84
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
US pulled out of INF in 2018, ending it. Russia was essentially ignoring it anyway. We have since moved to field ground launched Tomahawk and other weapons that previously were not allowed.
2wealfth Man
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PJYoung said:


this source seems a little sketchy; lets wait on confirmation from another source or two
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ya I looked on ISW and Osint and didn't see a thing
AtticusMatlock
How long do you want to ignore this user?


ABATTBQ11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PJYoung said:




Pretty sure that's a Russian bot account.

Eliminatus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GAC06 said:

aggiehawg said:

First ever use of an ICBM is supposed to be a proportional response to US giving permission to Ukraine to use longer range (but not intercontinental range) for strikes deeper inside Russia?


It's not a proportional response, it's a scare tactic
Scare tactic for sure and fairly effective for the weaker west but I think the main goal honestly is to build as much leverage as he can when he is finally forced to the to table for talks. The nuclear stick about all he has left.

I figure the main points will start at freeze the lines at where they are at and wherever you are standing, you now own. But the sticking point for Russia will be Kursk. As of now, they will need to either negotiate for it, or threaten for it. Or threaten to get it back before the talks even begin. And we all know Putin's favorite tactic... Just my shot in the dark for now though.
2wealfth Man
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Eliminatus said:

GAC06 said:

aggiehawg said:

First ever use of an ICBM is supposed to be a proportional response to US giving permission to Ukraine to use longer range (but not intercontinental range) for strikes deeper inside Russia?


It's not a proportional response, it's a scare tactic
Scare tactic for sure and fairly effective for the weaker west but I think the main goal honestly is to build as much leverage as he can when he is finally forced to the to table for talks. The nuclear stick about all he has left.

I figure the main points will start at freeze the lines at where they are at and wherever you are standing, you now own. But the sticking point for Russia will be Kursk. As of now, they will need to either negotiate for it, or threaten for it. Or threaten to get it back before the talks even begin. And we all know Putin's favorite tactic... Just my shot in the dark for now though.
Kursk is shrinking very slowly day by day. They have fielded a newly formed army group (with their Nork friends helping out) to retake that salient. I am afraid by inauguration time there won't be much territory to swap unless the Uke's can create some very strong defensive positions and use those AP mines effectively. Uke are going to have to give up Donbas and Luhansk without a doubt. Maybe they can get some territory north of Karkhov back in a settlement.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag said:

Pentagon was also notified before it was launched
Putin maybe be an *******, but he's not suicidal.

He knew launching this could have been looked at as a launch towards a NATO country when it first took off. You don't know the actual trajectory at that time.

He wanted to make sure there wasn't a massive retaliatory strike in response.
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Background on the RS-26 missile.

"First off, it's worth recalling that the RS-26 is widely viewed as an intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM), a class of weapon that has a range of somewhere between approximately 1,860 and 3,410 miles based on the ranges it achieved in tests. However, Russia has previously described it as an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), a type of weapon that can hit targets at more than around 3,410 miles."

IRBM
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Latest campaign assessment from ISW. As always, if too long scroll down to bullet summary points.

"Neither the Oreshnik ballistic missile strike nor Putin's November 21 statement represent a significant inflection in Russian strike capabilities or likeliness to use a nuclear weapon. Russian forces fire nuclear-capable Iskander ballistic missiles, Kinzhal hypersonic ballistic missiles, and nuclear-capable Kh-101 cruise missiles against Ukraine on a regular basis. Previous Russian missile strikes have targeted industrial and critical infrastructure including within Dnipro City that caused greater damage.[9] The only fundamentally new characteristic of the Russian strikes against Dnipro City on November 21 was the Oreshnik missile itself, which ostentatiously showcased reentry vehicles to amplify the spectacle of the strike and further imply a nuclear threat.[10][11] The West maintains credible deterrence options and Putin's nuclear saber-rattling should not constrain Western officials from choosing to further aid Ukraine. US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director Bill Burns cautioned Western policymakers against fearing Putin's nuclear rhetoric in September 2024, describing Putin as a "bully" who will "continue to saber rattle from time to time."[12]"

ISW
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag said:

Ya I looked on ISW and Osint and didn't see a thing
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ABATTBQ11 said:

PJYoung said:




Pretty sure that's a Russian bot account.



Sorry!
First Page
Page 1375 of 1376
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.