Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Russia - threadbanned users in OP

1131313141316131813193690

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,514 ✭✭✭RGARDINR


    I am surprised that putin doesn't use a small nuclear device on the aszovptal steel plant. Could spin it there way to say they cleared out the supposedly nazis they keep saying there against. Could sell it to their population easier. Free up there forces from there. I hope to god they don't but I'm surprised they don't use one there on them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,828 ✭✭✭threeball


    If Putrid uses a nuclear weapon anywhere I think all bets are off. Theres a good chance no one waits around for him to use the next one. Would you risk a nuclear retaliatory strike to take a steel plant? He's made some the the most stupid decisions ever so far but I think even that's a step too far.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,089 ✭✭✭✭Headshot


    Looks like Moldova is next to be invaded



  • Posts: 7,946 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Law of unintended consequences. Russia isn't the only country with hawks. It would be enough for at least some senior US military to be clamouring for a US first strike.

    You start firing nukes you CANNOT guarantee they won't come back at you.

    That's not saying he won't. It's why, I think, he hasn't already.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Russia media has already claimed that oppression of Russians is going on there, so it will need to be "liberated"



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 7,946 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    By who? Hitler made a huge mistake attacking Russia opening a second front. That won't be lost on Putin.

    Putin is stretched as it is. Maybe he thinks he can get a quick victory there for May 9th, but from a strategic POV it would be stupid.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,003 ✭✭✭Dufflecoat Fanny


    Classic honey trapped behaviour just like trump



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,854 ✭✭✭zv2


    Wasn't there some guy, Adolf I think, started a war on two fronts and got blasted? The Moldova thing might be a decoy.

    It looks like history is starting up again.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,774 ✭✭✭storker



    They'll have loads, but how good they are is another matter.

    Armies tend to have more a lot more generals than people imagine. Even just the French I Corps at Waterloo had 1 x corps and 5 x divisional generals plus 10 brigade generals for a total of 16. II Corps would have had around 13, VI Corps around 10, III and IV Cavalry Corps maybe another 14 and the Imperial Guard I'd say over 20, because some of the infantry formations in the Guard had double the allocation of generals. So that's 64+ generals for the French* with the Anglo-Allied and Prussian armies probably fielding a similar number.

    That's not counting Generals without combat commands e.g. filling staff roles, or acting as Aides de Camp. In the case of the French, that's also not counting the generals of 2 x infantry and 2 x cavalry corps that were part of the Armee du Nord for that campaign but not on the field of Waterloo, instead fighting the Prussians at Wavre a few miles away.

    Nowadays where armies have a much longer support "tail" than they had 200 years ago you get plenty of generals there too.


    *Total strength on the field was about 72,000



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,897 ✭✭✭✭briany


    Hitler started a war on two fronts when he thought he had one front sown up, and this was basically true when he went to invade the USSR, as the United Kingdom by itself didn't look likely to be able to push into continental Europe. For Hitler, it really fell to sh*t when the U.S. got attacked by the Japanese, then got involved in the war, and combined with UK forces to liberate Europe, pushing from the west and that was too much pressure for the Nazis to handle, as they were already faltering in the east. Great video map of WW2's progress in Europe. The Nazis who were already being pushed back by the Soviets, really fall asunder once the Allies land in Normandy.


    Anyway, although I get the comparisons between current-day Russia and Nazi Germany in the sense of the ultra-nationalism and aggression justified by the notion of larger historical lands and oppressed minorities, Putin's appraisal of his country's situation and military capability is far worse than Hitler's was. He is, as several posters have previously pointed out, a poundshop Hitler, at best.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,514 ✭✭✭RGARDINR


    I think if he used it there he would get away with it. 100% agree more pressure would happen on Russia but I wouldn't see America getting involved there still. Be different if major city one was used against I just think if it was used on the steelworks plant they would get away with using 1 there.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,514 ✭✭✭RGARDINR


    That's it America and other countries wouldn't use a nuclear strike back against Russia over a nuclear strike against a steel plant so yes if I was putin I would probably use it there if I was to use 1 in this war. Things would be different if it was used against a major city other then there a steel plant, countries might then intervene military against Russia but not nuclear unless Russia used it then against their forces.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,828 ✭✭✭threeball


    So you would use a nuclear weapon just for the sake of it to take a piece of land you have surrounded and can bypass easily. In doing so you must remove your own troops to a safe distance or nuke them too. Thereby opening an escape window for those trapped inside. You also open yourself to unknown consequences not only of the nuclear variety. Doesn't sound like a great plan.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 34,803 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    The extent of theft across all sectors of their military has been severely underestimated. It's clearly endemic and rife. Where wages are absolutely absysmal and individuals see those above them driving around in fancy cars or clothes or going to Spain on holidays they will all want the same thing . Stealing parts, stealing entire weapons systems selling them off on any/all markets . I'm sure the supply chain to Africa has been booming since the fall of the USSR. Putin probably genuinely thought the billions pumped to the military was going on bumping stocks of equipment up . It was evidently going to bump people's luxury life quality.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,474 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    Talk of nuclear weapons ignores that they are extremely dangerous and release a lot of radioactivity. It's not just a 'large explosive device' but something much worse. They are virtually impossible to use in a conventional war setting.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 39,306 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    History books will look back in horror at the inaction of the West in stopping Putin. And considering Putin is a pathological liar do people really believe Russia has the nuclear weapons they claim to have. I think not.



  • Posts: 7,946 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,828 ✭✭✭threeball


    Yes another point I was going to add but didn't want a needlessly long post. Irradiate the only corridor they have so far managed to secure for land access to Crimea. It's an idea that gets stupider the more you scratch even just the surface.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,116 ✭✭✭archer22


    Maybe the Germans remember the pictures of Russian and American troops hugging each other at the Elbe while Germans were being murdered raped and ethnically cleansed in the background.

    The 77th anniversary of it is in two days time...and then there was the Morgenthau plan for Germany which was only abandoned after the huggers fell out over the spoils.

    Can't blame the Germans for trusting nobody now, and putting their own people first.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,474 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    I can't think of any scenario where Putin could use even a small one and not face the direst of consequences and condemnation. Even the Russian public would know a red line had been crossed, no matter how much the state media would try and justify it.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,787 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Intelligence has the Russians launching cruise missiles from submarines - they have added 4 more to the black sea, I presume from ports as the Bosphoross Straits are supposed to be closed - from a depth of 50m since the Moskva sank.

    In the latest 800m aid package from Uncle Sam, was an item called unmanned amphibious vessels, or some such. This is a secret and currently classified program so there are no details on what these are, but I wonder are they drone submarine hunters?

    I hope so, because the Russians losing submarines for launching missiles from would be great, not to mention the prestige hit.



  • Posts: 7,946 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Are you forgetting that the West helped rebuild West Germany and backed reunification. If the West took the same selfish attitude Germany would never have recovered.

    Germany contributed to one world war and started another. They don't get to sit on the sidelines now and to expect a 'pass'.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,787 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    One of the main reasons he wants Mariupol is it's a port city and he wants the port bit which is walking distance from the steel plant. A de-mining team has just arrived to make the port operable. Drop a nuke on the steel plant and the port is gone for at least a decade or more.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,828 ✭✭✭threeball


    Ah stop, would ya. The Germans had groups of soldiers who had very specific orders to use sex as a weapon. Ever heard of Joy division, they're not just a band.

    Other groups of soldiers would go around and pack villagers into wooden trailers then set them on fire.

    I dont really think they're in a position to start getting all morally superior all of a sudden. They have a very serious character flaw where Germany and the good of her people trumps all else and they're happy for others to suffer as long as they prosper. It's a trait they really need to address.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,514 ✭✭✭RGARDINR


    Well of course you remove your troops. I wouldn't know how long it would take for the Russians to be removed to a safe distance. I suppose it would free up to 10 to 20k of Russian troops tied down there if reports are to believed that are been held up there, just depends if they can withdraw without the Ukrainian side noticing same. Would also I suppose from Putin's mindset to Ukraine and the west, I have used a nuke I am not afraid to and you never know I could use another one again.



  • Posts: 7,946 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    A low yield tactical nuke and they could move back in very soon. Even the two Japanese cities were rebuilt, even ground zero, remarkably quickly. That's the thing with a nuke, the nuclear material mostly gets used up in the explosion, especially if detonated a km in the air. In contrast to a reactor leak.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,787 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui




  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,351 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Well not really. It very much depends on how you detonate a nuclear device. They're far more efficient than the two WW2 examples so they convert far more of their fuel in the blast, so outside of the intial radiation pulse, they don't leave much radioactivity after a few weeks and radioactive effects on people fall off sharply with distance. that is IF they're an airburst, IE detonated at say 300 metres above the ground. That does the most damage over the widest area and gives you more buck for your bang. If they're detonated when they hit the ground that causes a lot more radioactivity to be released and retained but reduces the range of damage. Compared to conventional bombs they're more directional in their damage. So that old "duck and cover"in a ditch had some merit. If you were in a natural valley or hollow you could be a lot closer to the blast and survive than if you were on flatland.

    Many worry about Artificial Intelligence. I worry far more about Organic Idiocy.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,116 ✭✭✭archer22


    No never heard of the "joy division" thats a new one, what propagandist thought that one up.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement