[RD] Russia Invades Ukraine: War News Thread: Round 6

[Birdjaguar]

Moderator Action: Many posts moved. This is the War news thread.

 

[red_elk]

Latest European polls

Interesting site, thank you.

 

[Gedemon]

The problem is that your opinion about the improbability of threats will not affect the transition from threats to action in any way. Russia has a gigantic unilateral advantage in tactical nuclear weapons. Which ensures Biden and Co.'s amazing restraint regarding no-fly zones and any other direct confrontation with Russia.

I'm just saying that Russia used the nuclear threat for every single things that was not going in their favor for 15 years now, so no one find it credible anymore.

MBT are being sent, jet fighters and long range missiles are next, IMO we could have skipped the previous small steps and saved Ukrainian lives.

 

[red_elk]

I'm just saying that Russia used the nuclear threat for every single things that was not going in their favor for 15 years now, so no one find it credible anymore.

In this case a possibility of "escalation" from NATO was mentioned and I responded that Russia reserves the right to defend itself up to using nuclear weapons.
So it seems you confused who is actually threatening here.

 

[Kaitzilla]

I'm just saying that Russia used the nuclear threat for every single things that was not going in their favor for 15 years now, so no one find it credible anymore.

MBT are being sent, jet fighters and long range missiles are next, IMO we could have skipped the previous small steps and saved Ukrainian lives.

Anything that gets sent must be assumed to end up in Russian hands for study at some point, even if they ultimately lose the war somehow.

None of the top-shelf stuff is going to be given to Ukraine.

 

[pecheneg]

As far as the nuke option goes, I do not think that Putin wants to or will pull the trigger on the destruction of Russia or the West.

Putin, perhaps mistakenly, does not consider the United States insane enough to exchange Kiev for an exchange of mutual total strikes.

Prior to Feb 24th 2022, Putin had gotten away with all of his efforts with minimal effects from the West. The invasion changed the game completely and what had happened before was swept away and off the table. None of the prior events and accusations mattered any more. The very successful Ukrainian resistance emphasized that everything from the past decade no longer mattered. The NATO reaction is a clear reinforcement of that message. Whatever situations created by Minsk, Donbas, Crimea, etc. no longer apply. For Putin the invasion was "a bridge too far".

Yes, previous administrations in the West were not crazy enough. Now such intellectuals as Biden, Truss, Johnson and Burbok have been in power.
The problem is that it's one thing to accept 1001 packages of sanctions that the Russians won't notice too much. And it's completely different to grab a strategic nuclear weapon, inevitably getting an answer.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Anything that gets sent must be assumed to end up in Russian hands for study at some point, even if they ultimately lose the war somehow.

None of the top-shelf stuff is going to be given to Ukraine.

At this point it should be clear that "top-shelf stuff" is not necessary to defeat the Russian army and in fact a Leopard 2a4 or a f-16 is in no way top-shelf stuff. Also there is not evidence of any Caesar, Pzh2000 or any other western system being captured by Russia. Ukrainians apparently dont use to run away leaving his equipment to the enemy as Russians do.

About nuclear threats it is a curious way of defending itself. Even using a small tactical nuke let's say in Bakhmut is opening a whole can of worms what will lead to a number of possible sceneries, in most of them all major Russian cities are turned into smoke, but there is some more benign ones where Moscow is turned unhabitable for an Ukrainian dirty bomb, or the whole western Russia by some nuclear power station blown up when a fresh breeze is blowing west to east. In any case not a pretty scenery for Russia, and obviously much worse than being beaten in Ukraine, as probably will happen.

 

[saamohod]

Putin, perhaps mistakenly, does not consider the United States insane enough to exchange Kiev

United States cannot exchange something they don't possess.

 

[Remorseless1]

No one in the "West" is remotely considering the use of nuclear weapons, that comes solely from the invading country. NATO et al has warned of massive conventional strikes inside Russia proper should Putin use a nuclear weapon. Biden and the other western leaders may not be top of the line, but they compare favorably to the murderous autocrat who currently occupies the Kremlin.

 

[Gedemon]

In this case a possibility of "escalation" from NATO was mentioned and I responded that Russia reserves the right to defend itself up to using nuclear weapons.
So it seems you confused who is actually threatening here.

And I have no doubt Russia would defend itself, but no one is speaking of invading or destroying Russia.

Yet here we are: "be careful, don't dare to help Ukraine because we have nuclear weapons", every week since last year.

Anything that gets sent must be assumed to end up in Russian hands for study at some point, even if they ultimately lose the war somehow.

None of the top-shelf stuff is going to be given to Ukraine.

So that was the message about the US support being "finite", no F-35 or B-2 for Ukraine then.

But... M1 Abrams (stripped down, but still), a few Leopard 2 A6, HIMARS (I think the Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb from the next package is top-shelf stuff), CAESARs, Pzh 2000, etc...

The equivalent for jet fighters would be F-16 or Gripen. And SCALP (AKA Storm Shadow) cruise missiles have been rumored since some time (the export version has a 300km range)

 

[IgrOK[SU]]

Russia ‘loses 2,000 troops for every 100 yards won’​

 

[Birdjaguar]

Paywalled. How about a copy paste of the lead paragraphs?

 

[red_elk]

No one in the "West" is remotely considering the use of nuclear weapons, that comes solely from the invading country. NATO et al has warned of massive conventional strikes inside Russia proper should Putin use a nuclear weapon. Biden and the other western leaders may not be top of the line, but they compare favorably to the murderous autocrat who currently occupies the Kremlin.

Only because NATO currently has conventional superiority. In ~1980 for example, the situation was the opposite, USSR had no first use policy, while NATO doctrine considered possibility to use nuclear weapons in response to conventional attack, for example in Europe where USSR had conventional superiority.

And I have no doubt Russia would defend itself, but no one is speaking of invading or destroying Russia.

Yet here we are: "be careful, don't dare to help Ukraine because we have nuclear weapons", every week since last year.

Nobody says "don't dare to help Ukraine because we have nuclear weapons" either.
Several people in this thread suggested to provide Ukraine with missiles capable of reaching Moscow though.
Guess what Ukraine will do with such missiles? I'm lost in conjectures.

 

[Kaitzilla]

Hydrogen bombs are far more powerful than fission bombs.

I hope humanity never uses them on a city.

Spoiler :

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Hydrogen bombs are far more powerful than fission bombs.

I hope humanity never uses them on a city.

Spoiler :

Today most nuclear bombs are hydrogen bombs even the small ones. Once mastered they can be built in all shapes and sizes and are more versatile than classic pure fission bombs like the ones used against Japan (in fact a hydrogen bombs is basically a small fission bomb made of plutonium covered with lithium deuteride and other ingredients to increase the yield) There are even some aircraft-launched hydrogen bombs that can be adjusted in flight by the pilot, selecting the yield according to the target to destroy.

 

[Gedemon]

Only because NATO currently has conventional superiority. In ~1980 for example, the situation was the opposite, USSR had no first use policy, while NATO doctrine considered possibility to use nuclear weapons in response to conventional attack, for example in Europe where USSR had conventional superiority.

On Europe, not on USSR, but still yes. I remember a wargame on CPC/Atari XL with such scenario possible (not ending well most of the time). And I've read a few time a story about an supposed NATO exercice during which France had simulated the use of a tactical nuke on Western Germany to stop a USSR offensive, causing some indignation of course. Never been able to confirm that one, maybe just an urban legend from the cold war era.

Nobody says "don't dare to help Ukraine because we have nuclear weapons" either.
Several people in this thread suggested to provide Ukraine with missiles capable of reaching Moscow though.
Guess what Ukraine will do with such missiles? I'm lost in conjectures.

They have such missiles already as they've managed to reach the Engels Air Force Base. Which would be a better target for more missiles with that range, both on a military and propaganda point of view, and a strike on Moscow would be a very, very, very bad idea for the later.

But, why Moscow being hit by one conventional missile would cause a nuclear war, and not a strike on a city closer to the Ukrainian border, like Belgorod ?

 

[Broken_Erika]

And I've read a few time a story about an supposed NATO exercice during which France had simulated the use of a tactical nuke on Western Germany to stop a USSR offensive, causing some indignation of course. Never been able to confirm that one, maybe just an urban legend from the cold war era.

Well, NATO's openly declared policy was if the soviets crossed the Rhine was defense by any means necessary, up to and including the use of tactical nuclear weapons.
In the movie The Day After, Soviet forces crossed the Rhine and NATO airbursted 3 low yield nuclear bombs over them thus starting an escalating nuclear exchange that ended with both sides destroying each others cities.

 

[red_elk]

They have such missiles already as they've managed to reach the Engels Air Force Base. Which would be a better target for more missiles with that range, both on a military and propaganda point of view, and a strike on Moscow would be a very, very, very bad idea for the later.

It wasn't missile, it was repurposed Soviet-era reconnaisance drone from 1970-s.

But, why Moscow being hit by one conventional missile would cause a nuclear war, and not a strike on a city closer to the Ukrainian border, like Belgorod ?

I didn't say it will necessarily cause nuclear war. Attacking Moscow would be a massive escalation and Putin will have to respond even if he doesn't want to.

 

[Gedemon]

It wasn't missile, it was repurposed Soviet-era reconnaisance drone from 1970-s.

I didn't say it will necessarily cause nuclear war. Attacking Moscow would be a massive escalation and Putin will have to respond even if he doesn't want to.

yes, repurposed drone, but they could have used it on Moscow and targeted Engels instead, why would they act differently with cruise missiles, if they had them ?

 

[pecheneg]

'm just saying that Russia used the nuclear threat for every single things that was not going in their favor for 15 years now, so no one find it credible anymore.

Not the most successful argument.
1. For reference, Americans have been doing this for 45 years. Having evolved from the threat of total nuclear war in case of inappropriate behavior of the USSR to the concept of limited war, when there was a threat to get an answer. And recently did it again
2. The nuclear powers have never threatened each other with a nuclear war in the event of arms supplies, and even more so Russia did not do this in 2022-23.

MBT are being sent,

Nevertheless, the Americans plan to deliver three dozen tanks by the end of the year - and the desired deadline for the end of the war is in the summer. The reasons are banal
1. The possibility of escalation against Ukraine. Including the actual threat of the use of nuclear weapons against Ukrainians.
2. The russians opportunity to make a lot of non-nuclear troubles like Russian proxies already on American bases, etc. At the same time, the last neuron died in the head of the collective European Burbok and the Europeans who went crazy from Russophobia can be substituted for trouble instead of themselves.

jet fighters and long range missiles are next,

You have already had "successes" in Crimea. Ukraine was a little unlucky after that. At the same time, Moscow will need all the reserves of pacifism in order not to deliver cruise missiles to someone who will use them on your territory. By the way, how is the heroic American air defense doing there?

IMO we could have skipped the previous small steps and saved Ukrainian lives.

The only option to save the lives of young Ukrainians was to fulfill the Minsk agreements or accept Putin's first offer in February.