Ukrainian War Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.

RottenPanzer

Junior Member
Registered Member
Not sure if you're joking or not, but Russian problems with their military can't be solved with a few good advice.... I believe they'll need another massive reform after this war

Heard a claim that Putin purged one of his general that was trying to reform the Russian Army
dunno if true or false cause it's from twitter where i heard it
 

james smith esq

Senior Member
Registered Member
Not sure if you're joking or not, but Russian problems with their military can't be solved with a few good advice.... I believe they'll need another massive reform after this war
I think that this force could’ve been effective, had the planners conceptualized and provided a coherent, focused, and achievable strategy.

This medieval, taking of cities was beyond stupid, and the multi-axes attacks on who-knows-what will perplex military historians ‘til infinity.

Simply advancing from Crimea to the eastern and western borders and somewhat north along the Dnieper would’ve been strategically logical, quickly achievable and easily defensible. It would’ve established a hundreds kilometer long front line that would require any responding forces to expose themselves to Russian air interdiction and artillery and MLRS fire while drawing them away from the both the capital and the geographic center of the country.
 
Last edited:

james smith esq

Senior Member
Registered Member
Heard a claim that Putin purged one of his general that was trying to reform the Russian Army
dunno if true or false cause it's from twitter where i heard it
I think I read that a few years back. If I’m not mistaken, it was the General that attempted to transition from Divisions to Brigades.
 

ArmchairAnalyst

Junior Member
Registered Member
No evidence that this will happen if you're talking about the hypothetical civilization-ending nuclear winter (in fact very unlikely), unless you mean that both Russia and America will being targeting random cities all around the world just for funsies? Utterly moronic, why would you waste nukes on random innocent people and innocent countries instead of your adversary who is trying to make you extinct? Silly. Not to mention they simply don't have enough warheads to cause the end of the world through targeting all cities.

Go check up on the yields of the vast majority of bombs then actually plot them:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


So the only way for a nuclear exchange to cause the end of the world is through the hyped up nuclear winter theory which as many smart non-political people have shown is very improbable. You can red some snippets on the controversy of the hyping up of the supposed end of the world through global thermonuclear war (perhaps its good liberal academics are lying this time) here:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
It's all a theoretically discussion still as we haven't witness an all-out nuclear war yet.
Nobody really knows for sure other than it would be catastrophic on an unfathomable scale.
Extinction of humanity, questionable. Collapse of civilization, very likely.
My take on the least grim outcome: There won't be any real winners, just unluckly survivers in fast declining numbers due to radiation (both short and long term fallout), other sickness, starvation (nuclear winter and nuclear famine ) and lots of other nightmarish hardship for decades and even centuries to come.
To believe in less severe consequences is a fallacy in my opinion. Most likely it will be far worse than this.
Lots of academic papers on nuclear war out there in addition to the various wikipedia articles already mentioned.
Only a few outliers advocate that an all-out nuclear war can be won in any meaningful way.

*Note that I wrote an all-out nuclear war, not a limited nuclear war between two adversaries (which according to most simulations done never stay limited anyways).

Enough off-topic ;)
 

enroger

Junior Member
Registered Member
I think that this force could’ve been effective, had the planners conceptualized and provided a coherent, focused, and achievable strategy.

This medieval, taking of cities was beyond stupid, and the multi-axes attack on who-knows-what will perplex military historians ‘til infinity.

Simply advancing from Crimea to the eastern and western borders and somewhat north along the Dnieper would’ve been strategically logical, quickly achievable and easily defensible. It would’ve established a hundreds kilometer long front line that would require any responding forces to expose themselves to Russian air interdiction and artillery and MLRS fire while drawing them away from the both the capital and the geographic center of the country.

Agree, Putin bite off more than he can chew, in terms of troops number and logistics.... What you said is more reasonable, I'd settle for a slightly enlarged Donetsk/Luhansk, fuck up the nazi's in Mariupol, link up with Crimea, go in as peace keeping force making those regions de facto independent.

Or even better, don't start the damn thing at all..... Or if he really wanted to wreck Ukraine, then go all in don't half ass it, as Mike Ehrmantraut said "No more half measures"

 

ArmchairAnalyst

Junior Member
Registered Member
Agree, Putin bite off more than he can chew, in terms of troops number and logistics.... What you said is more reasonable, I'd settle for a slightly enlarged Donetsk/Luhansk, fuck up the nazi's in Mariupol, link up with Crimea, go in as peace keeping force making those regions de facto independent.

Or even better, don't start the damn thing at all..... Or if he really wanted to wreck Ukraine, then go all in don't half ass it, as Mike Ehrmantraut said "No more half measures"

Remind me again how it ends for Mike :D
 

james smith esq

Senior Member
Registered Member
It's all a theoretically discussion still as we haven't witness an all-out nuclear war yet.
Nobody really knows for sure other than it would be catastrophic on an unfathomable scale.
Extinction of humanity, questionable. Collapse of civilization, very likely.
My take on the least grim outcome: There won't be any real winners, just unluckly survivers in fast declining numbers due to radiation (both short and long term fallout), other sickness, starvation (nuclear winter and nuclear famine ) and lots of other nightmarish hardship for decades and even centuries to come.
To believe in less severe consequences is a fallacy in my opinion. Most likely it will be far worse than this.
Lots of academic papers on nuclear war out there in addition to the various wikipedia articles already mentioned.
Only a few outliers advocate that an all-out nuclear war can be won in any meaningful way.

*Note that I wrote an all-out nuclear war, not a limited nuclear war between two adversaries (which according to most simulations done never stay limited anyways).

Enough off-topic ;)
!!!GLOBAL SOUTH!!!
 

enroger

Junior Member
Registered Member
Heard a claim that Putin purged one of his general that was trying to reform the Russian Army
dunno if true or false cause it's from twitter where i heard it

I'd take anything on twitter about Putin purging with ocean worth of salt, lets wait for verification..... I believe Putin himself would want to reform their army seeing such inadequacy
 

james smith esq

Senior Member
Registered Member
I'd take anything on twitter about Putin purging with ocean worth of salt, lets wait for verification..... I believe Putin himself would want to reform their army seeing such inadequacy
I read about the successive attempted reforms on Wikipedia. And, unfortunately, I don’t think Putin has an effin’ clue about military organization or structure, units or formations, tactics or strategy. He has to trust the opinions of the incompetents he’s surrounded by! It will be, truly, mind-boggling if Putin’s Russia is undone by this unnecessary misadventure!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top