Russia sending 40 mile convoy

2. The Russians have not established air supremacy, due to Stingers and other surface-to-air Ukrainian assets.

3. Anti-tank and anti vehicle assets of the Ukrainians have been every effective up to now.

Given the information civilians get through tweets and MSM. :rolleyes:

Pretty hefty assumptions, don't you think?
 
Always can be. War is a very fluid environment, full of pluses and minuses to any move or battle configuration. Three things though. 1. That is not a tactical battle configuration by any stretch of the imagination and they are located inline extending up to and through the border officially the FEBA. 2. The Russians have not established air supremacy, due to Stingers and other surface-to-air Ukrainian assets.
3. Anti-tank and anti vehicle assets of the Ukrainians have been every effective up to now.

Even without much air-support, they're doing a good job of knocking out Russian helos and tanks with those missiles. There isn't much Russian presence in the Western part of Ukraine, and that's where they're being resupplied from across the Polish border.

I've been watching a flight-tracker for the last 8 hours as US and UK transports were landing in Poland. You can guess what kind of goodies were on those planes. The Russians might be able to cut off Kyiv, but that's not going to end it.
 
If Russia can’t even beat Ukraine ?? They would get obliterated to France
 
Given the information civilians get through tweets and MSM. :rolleyes:

Pretty hefty assumptions, don't you think?
Think what you like. Every General has said pretty much the same thing I did and more.
 
I have seen Sat photos even sharper than that. I suspect it is the real deal.
I would expect nothing less from professional spooks. To think the unaided eye could tell the diff? :heehee:
 
Think what you like. Every General has said pretty much the same thing I did and more.
Have you heard of one, just one example, of a resounding success of the Russian military. . . anywhere in western media. . .

. . . and if not, why do you suppose the Russians would allow Ukraine to keep internet functionality? :dunno:
 
Have you heard of one, just one example, of a resounding success of the Russian military. . . anywhere in western media. . .

. . . and if not, why do you suppose the Russians would allow Ukraine to keep internet functionality? :dunno:
No. Not in real life either. Have you seen Charlie Wilson's War. It is dramatized but as for what happened, close to accurate. Having the most and best does not guarantee quick success. Even the old Soviet's strategy depended on mass, not maneuver to a large extent.
 
Have you heard of one, just one example, of a resounding success of the Russian military. . . anywhere in western media. . .

. . . and if not, why do you suppose the Russians would allow Ukraine to keep internet functionality? :dunno:
There are enough Sat internet resources, I am not sure they can keep Ukraine dark at the moment.
 
No. Not in real life either. Have you seen Charlie Wilson's War. It is dramatized but as for what happened, close to accurate. Having the most and best does not guarantee quick success. Even the old Soviet's strategy depended on mass, not maneuver to a large extent.
There is a lot more behind that than you know. But? It would not have been possible w/o spooks. And that film is propaganda.

 
Many “American leftist kids “ are saying they want USA to use stealth bombers to take out convoy

😂 😆

That would guarantee Russian warheads in route to US cities

A friend of mine from The Navy became an nuclear engineer working for DOE after he got out. He was involved in START inspections in the Soviet Union. We talked when he passed through South Korea on the way back and he told me the shocking state of disrepair of the Soviet ICBMs in the early '90s. Rusted out rockets, malfunctioning equipment, flooded missile silos.

He said he doubted that 10% of the Soviet ICBM capability would have been able to get out of the launch tubes. I can't imagine it's improved a lot since then. Military buildup hasn't exactly been a high priority since the collapse of The Soviet Union.
 
There is a lot more behind that than you know. But? It would not have been possible w/o spooks. And that film is propaganda.


Afghanistan became a "bleeding wound" for the Soviets, as President Mikhail Gorbachev said in 1986. He decided to pull his country's troops out, a process that took another three years.

"All foreign forces invading must learn it's easy to enter Afghanistan," Seraj says. "It's very difficult to leave Afghanistan."


I think Joe found out the same thing.
 
Afghanistan became a "bleeding wound" for the Soviets, as President Mikhail Gorbachev said in 1986. He decided to pull his country's troops out, a process that took another three years.

"All foreign forces invading must learn it's easy to enter Afghanistan," Seraj says. "It's very difficult to leave Afghanistan."


I think Joe found out the same thing.

Still doesn't change the facts.
 
A friend of mine from The Navy became an nuclear engineer working for DOE after he got out. He was involved in START inspections in the Soviet Union. We talked when he passed through South Korea on the way back and he told me the shocking state of disrepair of the Soviet ICBMs in the early '90s. Rusted out rockets, malfunctioning equipment, flooded missile silos.

He said he doubted that 10% of the Soviet ICBM capability would have been able to get out of the launch tubes. I can't imagine it's improved a lot since then. Military buildup hasn't exactly been a high priority since the collapse of The Soviet Union.
. . . what about the condition of American nukes?

How about Chinese nukes?

Shall we start a global conflict and see whose nukes are in the best condition?

:dunno:
 
I have friends I can visit in Australia. I say go for it.
Everyone might burn and melt. . . ???

But you? You would slowly starve. None of the plants would get any sun.


 

Forum List

Back
Top