The first footage of a strike drone being used by Russia. It's taken them a long time to deploy them but I think if Russia had a hundred of them their deployment would be decisive. I assume it's the Orion, although Cassad is giving it a different name.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ukrainian War Developments
- Thread starter james smith esq
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
The first footage of a strike drone being used by Russia. It's taken them a long time to deploy them but I think if Russia had a hundred of them their deployment would be decisive. I assume it's the Orion, although Cassad is giving it a different name.
There were several videos from the Orion released before, I think, though.
I've seen lots of videos of Orlan guiding artillery but not the Orion. I could have missed it though.There were several videos from the Orion released before, I think, though.
You have (at best) a very different definition of what it would mean for China to win the war against Japan.
As far as I can infer, you apparently believe that China would win the war as long as it was not completely conquered.
That's not a definition that the vast numbers of Chinese under Japanese occupation would agree with.
For China to win the war, in my view, the Japanese would have to be driven out of all China, perhaps including Manchukuo.
China's victory would not require it to invade and conquer Japan, of course, which would something far beyond the
capabilities of China even today. China alone lacked the power to drive the Japanese out of China in 1937-45.
Could Japan have completely conquered China? I doubt it. China's just too vast of a space to occupy.
Japan might have conquered more ('Might makes right!') by practicing even more genocidal methods of warfare.
It seems unimaginable that Japan would ever become so weary of a protracted war of attrition that it would consider
withdrawing from all China in order to cut costs. No Japanese government could afford to lose that much face.
If China had fought *truly alone* against Japan, then the *best realistic outcome* for China would have been an
eventual stalemate, whereby Japan continued to occupy most of eastern China (while crushing Chinese partisans).
Can we stop that nonsense and return to topic ?Again, US export to Japan in exchange for what? Tokyo printed yen? How are the Japanese going to pay the US for importing US oils, scrap steel and natural resources? Yen printed in Tokyo?
The reason the US turned against the Japanese was NOT because of Japanese attack of any kind. Japanese invasion of Philippines are ONLY a pretext. It was because the Japanese are running out of gold! What are they going to pay the US for their purchase of US products (oil, scrap steel, etc.)?
The Japanese Invasion of China was a costly war for the Japanese. Because Japanese military consumes industrial products produce with materials and resources imported from the USA, paid for by Japanese savings accumulated over the decades of exporting cheap goods to the US market.
China was dirt poor, under developed, with next to none industry, and the Japanese can't even finish the war within they initially projected time frames. Once the war drags on, it would ONLY be cost for the Japanese, and no meaningful gain.
Sure you can say China has a lot of land, people and resources. But those are NOT industrialized, just like you have pointed out! What's the point of capturing land with millions of peasant who hates you and does guerrilla warfare with you, while what you've gain can NOT readily output industrial products to compensate for the cost of invasion?
Earlier I wrote about how the Russians have learned many lessons from this war that they'll apply in the next one. And one of those big lessons is this: build a gazillion attack drones. 500 is good, 5,000 even better if you can afford it. China should heed the same lesson. The first aerial wave into Taiwan, if there's a war between the two, needs to be hundreds of attack drones. I used to be a skeptic of the power of drones, but no longer. After this war and the Armenian war in 2020, the evidence is clear: build as many freaking attack drones as you possibly can. By the thousands and tens of thousands if you have the resources.The first footage of a strike drone being used by Russia. It's taken them a long time to deploy them but I think if Russia had a hundred of them their deployment would be decisive. I assume it's the Orion, although Cassad is giving it a different name.
Given the chaos of war, however, it seems likely that only a small minority of the real war criminals will ever face a trial.
"Teenage sisters 'raped' as horrors from Ukrainian town cut off for 35 days emerge"
"Two sisters [ages 15 and 16] were raped in one of the worst cases to emerge from a small town only just
reconnected with the outside world after 35 days of Russian occupation."
"“Women were pulled by their hair out of their basements, so that they could abuse them.
Girls started cutting their hair short to be less attractive, so no one looks at them anymore.”"
Rape is a crime for which the offenders are rarely punished.
Yet the victims must live--if they can (some take their own lives)--with the trauma for a long time.
Please let us limit our discussion to the specifics of war.You have (at best) a very different definition of what it would mean for China to win the war against Japan.
As far as I can infer, you apparently believe that China would win the war as long as it was not completely conquered.
That's not a definition that the vast numbers of Chinese under Japanese occupation would agree with.
For China to win the war, in my view, the Japanese would have to be driven out of all China, perhaps including Manchukuo.
China's victory would not require it to invade and conquer Japan, of course, which would something far beyond the
capabilities of China even today. China alone lacked the power to drive the Japanese out of China in 1937-45.
Could Japan have completely conquered China? I doubt it. China's just too vast of a space to occupy.
Japan might have conquered more ('Might makes right!') by practicing even more genocidal methods of warfare.
It seems unimaginable that Japan would ever become so weary of a protracted war of attrition that it would consider
withdrawing from all China in order to cut costs. No Japanese government could afford to lose that much face.
If China had fought *truly alone* against Japan, then the *best realistic outcome* for China would have been an
eventual stalemate, whereby Japan continued to occupy most of eastern China (while crushing Chinese partisans).
My point is simple:
1. The reality of Empire Japan's war-machine/industry:
- They rely on materials and resources imported from the USA,
- The Japanese paid for these imports from the USA with their own wealth (gold).
- Their wealth was accumulated by providing/selling cheap goods to the US market for decades.
- The US will only accept gold-standard payments for Japanese purchases, once Japan runs out of gold, no more US imports.
- The Japanese will have to find alternative of oil, scrap steel, and other material and resources suppliers. (SEA was an inferior but viable option)
2. The reality of industrial capacity and undeveloped sources of resources around Japan:
- The Chinese mainland (central plain) back then was poor and unindustrialized, thus can provide only limited real values to the overall strength of the Japanese.
- Manchuria and Chinese mainland have the potential of industrialization, as well as untapped resources, but it will take significant time and investment to transform those to real industrial outputs of either complete products or primary-products/resources.
- Siberia is cold, vast, extremely bad transportation and infrastructure, etc.
- South East Asia are colonies of European powers, they can provide a lot of resources and materials readily for Japanese industrial consumption and the sustainment of Japanese war machine, BUT their capacity is still a lot less that that the USA, only barely sufficient to replace US imports. However, they are far from the Japanese main island industrial bases, and there are significant US naval/military presence in the Philippines that can disrupt and even destroy this maritime supply route.
3. The reality of Japanese invasion of China:
- The Japanese failed to succeed and end the war quickly, or even come to a ceasefire with the ROC.
- In the course of the long war, Japanese wealth was decrease steadily until depletion. This means they can NOT get more wealth from the invasion of China than what it cost them: it cost gold to buy resources and materials from the USA to sustain the war effort in China, but what they are getting in return from China simply can not compensate enough to balance their book at least. Otherwise they will never run out of gold. This is also evident from point 2 previously: China mainland and Manchuria does NOT have readily available industrial outputs or sources outputs to start with. They have the potential but it takes more time and resources to transform that into production capacity.
- The Japanese failed to even form a working relationship with the occupied Chinese population, to make the only readily available resources - manpower, a meaningful addition to Japanese military industrial system. All they ever did is to fund and supply incompetent collaboration military units (皇协军), and exploited forced labors that still make no strategic differences.
- The Japanese can't effectively suppress the guerrilla warfare in occupied China. This makes it very costly and meaningless in their occupation. They loot and rob local people, gaining only their hate, yet, the measly little products/wealth a pre-industrialized society can produce is not enough to rob for the Japanese to even compensate for the industrial cost to sustain their occupation.
This is why I think the Japanese will eventually lose, regardless of whether the US help China or not.
Now if we can look at the industry/wealth part of the game in this war in Ukraine. I think it will be interesting.
1. Likely another week. The eastern bank in Mauripol got pacified.Questions for everyone!
1. How much longer for Mauripol to fall?
2. How many troops will the Russians be able to free up from the Mauripol fight once it does fall and how many will need to be pulled back for replenishment and resupply?
3. How many reinforcements will the Russians bring elsewhere?
4. Will Belarus get into the fight?
5. Will the Ukrainians be able to shift enough forces east to prevent the kessel?
6. Will the weapons being delivered now (BMPs, T-72s, Switchblade 600s, etc) be enough to make a difference?
7. Will there be more raids across the border by the Ukrainians?
8. Will the successful supplying of the Ukrainians by the Czechs and Germans with their AFVs be enough to encourage even more... risky gifting by the West?
9. How much longer will the war last?
2. According to pro Russian sources. There is currently 40,000 Russian and allies forces fighting in the city against which was formerly 14,000 defender now its 4,000 defenders. Once the city is freed you would imagine 30k of them will be sent to the Donbas front.
3. It was reported Russia had 40k fighters outside of Kiev. So the bulk of them are going to Donbas. You have 40k in Mauripol so the bulk of them will go to Donbas. Right there you have about 70k mobilized. Troops are being sent from Russia as well. There is reports that 200k-250 Russian forces and allies will take part of the offensive. I think it’s more likely 100k Russian fighters and 70k allies from the DPR/LPR. Whatever the final number it’s going to be very massive.
4. I doubt Belarus will join. They have Belorussian neo nazis openly calling for attacks and the overthrow of the govt. So they will keep troops in the country in case a major attack happens. Would t be surprised if the Belorussian neo nazis plan a major attack once it looks like Kiev is losing.
5. I doubt it. Their fuel depots are destroyed so they don’t have fuel to do anything. I can see them try an offensive prevent the encirclement. The rebels in Syria did this everytime before a major offensive was about to launch. It’ll fail.
6. Most of these weapons will be stuck in West Ukraine. I don’t see how any of the current weaponry that Ukraine has gotten from the west can get to the Donbas in time. They are low in fuel. Likely they’ll stay there or be used in the fight for Odessa.
7. Very likely. The Ukrainians are brave and fighting like lions. They aren’t going down without a fight. I can see raids in Belarus too.
8. Very much so. It’s easy for the west. They’ll just keep supplying Ukraine when it looks like they are losing. They want this to be a redux of Afghanistan so bad.
9. I say this war in its surrender form will end in July/August. Even when the Ukrainian army is wiped out in Donbas I highly doubt Zelensky will surrender. He will be defiant. Phase three will likely be Nicolaev, Kharkiv,Sumy and Odessa. Phase 3 will be even more bloody urban warfare.
What's the point in posting this? You think anyone here supports that? If true, there's only one punishment for rapists in war.
"Teenage sisters 'raped' as horrors from Ukrainian town cut off for 35 days emerge"
"Two sisters [ages 15 and 16] were raped in one of the worst cases to emerge from a small town only just
reconnected with the outside world after 35 days of Russian occupation."
"“Women were pulled by their hair out of their basements, so that they could abuse them.
Girls started cutting their hair short to be less attractive, so no one looks at them anymore.”"
Rape is a crime for which the offenders are rarely punished.
Yet the victims must live--if they can (some take their own lives)--with the trauma for a long time.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.