Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Russia - threadbanned users in OP

1241024112413241524163690

Comments

  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,654 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    If you think Russia was the only country that had an issue with nuclear proliferation in the wake of the break-up of the USSR then there is little point discussing anything more about this with you. Why else are the US and the UK negotiating the signing the bloody thing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 837 ✭✭✭junkyarddog


    This would be one of my concerns too.

    What happens if they simply can't sustain the loss of AFU personnel?

    Will russia simply win just by throwing by sheer numbers,as they've done in the past?

    Or will Ukraine allies step in to make up the numbers?

    It is worrying.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,654 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    The US has not invaded or started a war with Iran, nor are they currently doing so with NK.

    There would have been escalating diplomatic and economic pressure from all major powers.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,114 ✭✭✭prunudo


    You'd have to wonder are these fatalities caused by their own side, the so called cannon fodder, shot dead by their own side for not progressing forwards.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,654 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Russia doesn't have the "sheer numbers" that they did in the past - nor is it remotely as easy to mobilise your society at large for an invasion as it is for defence of your homeland.

    Ukraine is not a small country population wise.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,069 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Right, so complete bollocks as expected. The only real intervention to stop a country acquiring nuclear weapons was the Israeli air raid on Iraq's nuclear reactor 40 years ago. No one stopped India or North Korea or Pakistan. It's a fantasy.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    I thought you don't do hypotheticals ,

    You made the claim , but there's no historical discussion on the subject,yes the US were signatories because they were the biggest political and military powerhouses at the time in the region,

    No point discussing it ,not because you say so ,

    But because it didn't happen and your hypothetically speaking



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,654 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I never claimed force would have been used.

    But had Ukraine not given up their nukes, I suspect they would not need to be worrying about a Russian invasion as they would be a satellite backwater much like Belarus (or indeed, NK) because they would have been economically annihilated and would certainly be a pariah in the west.

    There is a reason they gave them up after all.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,401 ✭✭✭RoyalCelt


    When Russia mobilised last year it came at least a month too late. The lines were not manned enough and they got routed in Kharkiv.

    If Putin is projecting they'll run out of mobilised by let's say late summer there's no point mobilising again then. It makes more sense to do it now and get them 5 months to a year worth of training before they hit the frontlines.

    Ultimately I think it's a smart decision and necessary if he wants any chance of holding current lines. Sadly I think this decision will see them last into 2024 and I wouldn't put it past him pulling a third mobilisation then.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    That claim came from a Russian source .

    Of course Ukraine are taking casualties nobody said they weren't but when the claims come from the Kremlin you know it's all lies



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    They do have what are called blocking forces in place to stop any numbers of troops retreating from positions,if Russians try to retreat they will be attacked by their own forces



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,654 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl



    I said it was a pointless hypothetical not that I "don't do hypotheticals".

    The US and UK were signatories because the US and UK also wanted to limit nuclear proliferation in the wake of the break-up of the USSR. If only Russia was concerned, why would they be involved at all?

    If you want to take the hypothetical to its full conclusion, Ukraine would be receiving zero support from the UK or US had they gone down that road. So maybe the nukes would have helped, maybe not.

    Also there is plenty of historical discussion on the topic. Here is a link to a body set up in the US precisely for this purpose https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006-05/features/nunn-lugar-15-time-relax-global-threat-reduction-efforts



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 837 ✭✭✭junkyarddog


    Mobilized russian artillery personnel complaining of being sent to infantry.

    Running out of shells for them?

    So send them to the front to be useful perhaps?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,294 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    That is the key. Russia has lost most of its modern tanks and armoured vehicles. It has used up a large amount of it munitions. During the last mobilisation it struggle to provide uniform's and weapons to the recruits

    Simple cheap old technology line like the LAWS anti tank rockets are proving very versatile in this war.

    Mobilisation will just mean more Russian deaths. Several NATO countries are training Ukrainian recruits since last June. Supposedly 15k every three months. These are highly skilled soldiers when trained. There will be 50k of these in place by late spring. Many of these are probably being trained in specialist NATO equipment and weapon systems.

    What Russia has left is mostly older T62 tanks. The tanks being given to the UA now will slice through these like butter the only worry would be if Russia has much in the way of handheld or there two man anti tank weapons and how effective these are.

    By the end of the winter the Russian army will be in a terrible place IMO. It will only be a case of mopping them up

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Come on now .

    Why were the British and Americans signatories?

    Not because they didn't want anyone else to have nuclear weapons,they were solely there to legimise the Russians scam , nothing else



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,395 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    Remember too that Poland and other Baltic states inc Finland are all looking on too. From their POV, prevention would be better than cure - so if Ukraine is seriously threatened, they could well either unilaterally or together enter the war. Not as NATO but as individual or group of states.



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,902 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Not unheard of. Most of my tank battalion went to Iraq as TWATs. (Tankers Without A Tank). Army decided that the could probably come up with a better name so officially "dragoons"

    US Army in WW2 went a similar way. The ratio of infantrymen in replacement troops was way underestimated for the first two years. By the end of the war, some 80% of recruits were branching infantry.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,069 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Very simple really, apply the same basic principle most western democracies use to select juries. In other words, you periodically select a couple hundred people to run the country for a few years.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,654 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Soviet Nuclear Threat Reduction Act of 1991

    SEC. 211. NATIONAL DEFENSE AND SOVIET WEAPONS DESTRUCTION. (a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds— (1) that Soviet President Gorbachev has requested Western help in dismantling nuclear weapons, and President Bush has proposed United States cooperation on the storage, transportation, dismantling, and destruction of Soviet nuclear weapons; (2) that the profound changes underway in the Soviet Union pose three types of danger to nuclear safety and stability, as follows: (A) ultimate disposition of nuclear weapons among the Soviet Union, its republics, and any successor entities that is not conducive to weapons safety or to international stability; (B) seizure, theft, sale, or use of nuclear weapons or components; and (C) transfers of weapons, weapons components, or weapons know-how outside of the territory of the Soviet Union, its republics, and any successor entities, that contribute to worldwide proliferation; and (3) that it is in the national security interests of the United States (A) to facilitate on a priority basis the transportation, storage, safeguarding, and destruction of nuclear and other weapons in the Soviet Union, its republics, and any successor entities, and (B) to assist in the prevention of weapons proliferation, (b) EXCLUSIONS.—United States assistance in destroying nuclear and other weapons under this title may not be provided to the Soviet Union, any of its republics, or any successor entity unless the President certifies to the Congress that the proposed recipient is committed to— (1) making a substantial investment of its resources for dismantling or destroying such weapons; (2) forgoing any military modernization program that exceeds legitimate defense requirements and forgoing the replacement of destroyed weapons of mass destruction; (3) forgoing any use of fissionable and other components of destroyed nuclear weapons in new nuclear weapons; (4) facilitating United States verification of weapons destruction carried out under section 212; (5) complying with all relevant arms control agreements; and (6) observing internationally recognized human rights, including the protection of minorities




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 837 ✭✭✭junkyarddog


    If the are able to mobilise another 500k like the rumor suggests,that is still a hell of a lot of personnel to have deal with.

    As for the invasion aspect,most russians are brainwashed into thinking they are defending their homeland.

    I just hope all those new toys the AFU get make a difference.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,379 ✭✭✭rolling boh


    I hope you are right but I think you are fairly optimistic about them being mopped up Putin has huge numbers to call on to keep this up and a few buddies to help him .We have hearing about Russia falling apart for a long time now but there is no sign of Putin accepting his mistake and calling things off .



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,654 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Who is going to train the 500k troops? Where are the officers and NCOs going to come from? It will be a rabble.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,051 ✭✭✭✭briany


    While any of these countries entering the war would probably help end the conflict sooner, creating a bigger headache for Russia than it already has, they're already in NATO, and that's their prevention. They would have little to fear from even pre-2022 Russian army under this arrangement, never mind the currently depleted one, so none of these countries will be unilaterally entering the fray under the basis of prevention.

    The most I see the likes of the Poles getting involved is maybe as some kind of peacekeeping force along the Ukraine-Belarus border, and that's still pretty unlikely.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 837 ✭✭✭junkyarddog


    I agree,but they still would be a time and resource drain on the AFU regardless of how untrained they are.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,069 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    This is how they are going to try and create enthusiasm for the next mobilization campaign of 500K lucky Orcs.

    Yay, WW2 weapons and a couple of ladies, who by the look of their appeciation for each other, won't have the slightest interest in a walking fertiliser bag.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,327 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,018 ✭✭✭jmreire


    That's not an accurate breakdown of costs though is it? To do that, you need to add in the value of every bit of destroyed Russian hardware, tanks, aircraft, ships, ammunition dumps etc. If all these values are added up and subtracted from the 50 billion, you will find that the individual Russian lives were the smallest cost.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,083 ✭✭✭✭Francie Barrett


    The Soledar situation still doesn't looks great.

    This is the most concise illustration I have seen to describe what has happened and how Russia managed to bypass a fortress so quickly.

    Soledar is essentially a barbell of a town. There's a northern part, and southern part with a narrow strip in-between.

    The southern part was a fortress that has held for months until now.

    It looks like the Russians made an assault across country that bypassed the most fortified areas in the southern part. Ukrainian troops who feared being cut off withdrew from the southern part to the northern part which is still contested.

    In the grand scheme of things, the advance is minor, but when you compare it to other Russian advances, it looks more significant.

    We will just have to wait and see how this all plays out. My guess is that Ukraine will heavily reinforce the northern part of Soledar that they control. It's too early to say who wins.

    The one thing that is abundantly clear is that Putin's talk of an Orthodox Christmas ceasefire was all a lie.

    The significant Russian advance we've seen over the last two days was planned and coordinated with the hope that they might have caught the Ukrainians off guard.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement