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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Russia-Ukraine War (continuing)

1369370372374375579

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,579 ✭✭✭thatsdaft


    there were obituaries for Russian bomber pilots from this base, seen it earlier bsky



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,337 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    it’s quite a ways away from the actual air base, so I’m not sure if aircraft operations as such are impeded

    Simple answer to that is : yes. Obituaries were posted today for two Russian pilots killed in the strike. In addition, there's footage of shrapnel/débris raining down on houses 5km from the site, and whole villages have been evacuated due to the damage caused by the blast wave. Aircraft in hangars might not have been directly affected, but I'd say there's a heck of a lot of auxillary systems that'll need to be checked before they can safely schedule flights again.

    The information that would be most interesting to learn would be what Ukraine used for this attack (and the attack on the Kraznowotzit pumping station) because they were both a serious escalation of damage caused. I am longing for the day Ukraine manages to achieve a similarly devastating attack on the Olenya airbase. If they can achieve that, then I reckon the end of the conflict will not be far behind … and it'll be Russia begging for a ceasefire.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,854 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    Lmao the crazy delusional Russian propagandists will help give Ireland to Trump lol

    Or Russia.....

    Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,947 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 880 ✭✭✭junkyarddog


    https://bsky.app/profile/antongerashchenko.bsky.social/post/3lkvzvp2ibk26

    Russian drone attack on Zaporizhzhia.

    Another mass drone attack on Ukraine.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,356 ✭✭✭thomil


    Both Engels and Olenya are long range bomber bases, with Engels being "relatively" close to Ukraine, and Olenya being quite a ways to the north on the Kola Peninsula. Engels is generally considered as Russia's main strategic bomber base, being home amongst other things, to squadrons flying Russia's top-of-the-line bomber, the Tu-160, NATO code name Blackjack. Relatively early in the war, when it became clear that Engels was in range of Ukrainian UAVs, a large number of Engels-based bombers was pulled back to other bases, with Olenya being one of the primary dispersal sites. It's pretty much the farthest away that Russia can base it's strategic bombers whilst still being within comfortable striking distance of Ukraine. Striking Olenya in a similar manner to the strike against Engels would mean that Russia has no "secure" bases available anymore in the European part of the country.

    EDIT:

    • Just to clarify, there are other airfields to which the long range bombers could be dispersed, but to the best of my knowledge, there aren’t many, if any, that could host long-range bombers over an extended period of time.
    • Olenya’s location on the Kola Peninsula, north of the Arctic Circle, means that any UCAV, missile or other weapons systems that can strike the airbase can also hit Russia’s submarine bases in the area. The Kola Peninsula is home to the ballistic missile submarines of the Northern Fleet, and striking Olenya would send a message that this part of Russia’s nuclear deterrent is now under threat.
    • For strategic or long-range bombers, read nuclear capable.
    Post edited by thomil on

    Good luck trying to figure me out. I haven't managed that myself yet!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,947 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    An informative and detailed post, I will watch out to see if Olenya gets a visit.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,916 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    If Putin ended the war tomorrow there wouldn't be a single person out marching for it to continue or calling for Putin to be impeached, they would tie themselves in knots to agree with whatever he says, there is no one worse they are just playing up to whichever direction Putin is pointing



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,916 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    Screenshot_20250322-025649.png

    Oh definitely nothing to see here..... definitely haven't dropped explosives that are set to go off in a weeks time when the ship is long gone



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,282 ✭✭✭Addmagnet


    A noteworthy juxtaposition of news stories in your screengrab there as well. This is at the milder end of the spectrum for all the people who want to put their head in the sand and question why they should be bothered about Ukraine/Russia/USA.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,646 ✭✭✭Field east


    IMO we are COMPLETELY fooling ourselves if we think that we can defend ourselves and be successful against most countries that might attack us except for a handful such as auS, Russia Germany ,Italy, France and a few others. I reckon that we might have a chance against for example ‘Malta’ , Moldova , Morocco, and other such countries of a similar and population.
    instead of putting our money and effort building up our stock of jets, ships , guns and suchlike armoury we should concentrate on building up our intelligence capacity so that we have state of the art ‘EYES AND EARS’ to see what is happening around us. Of course all of this is futile if we can do nothing about any threatening information AND THIS IS WHERE JOINING SOME GROUPING THAT CAN ADEQUATELY RESPOND eg NATO , arrangement with UK, etc



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,646 ✭✭✭Field east


    It might have suited Ireland to be a neutral country up till now . It made sence in the first few years of the country’s recent history ie when we became independant and trying to get that position embedded and not to be beholden to anyone.
    NOW we are in COMPLETELY DIFFERENT AND DANGEROUS TIMES - especially from a national security point of view. If a country from THE THE FAR SIDE OF THE WORLD wanted to ‘cause us problems’ it could Cut our service cables, set fire to any big facility , interfere with the internet,, fund groups that can cause serious problems in the running of our democracy, etc, etc.

    all of the above and more can be achieved by using a combination of tools such as:-

    Drones

    Sleepers

    Submarines in ‘ international waters’

    ’ICT Farms’ that remotely- obviously- specialise in attacking websites to spread false information, extract money, etc.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,646 ✭✭✭zv2


    @aidanodr"If we discover Russia is behind the substation fire that has brought down Heathrow (a big if) how do we respond?"

    That's at least an Article 4.5

    It looks like history is starting up again.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭seenitall


    Talked to a neighbour yesterday. She got spooked by seeing this on the news:

    https://news.sky.com/story/amp/france-reportedly-preparing-to-issue-survival-manual-to-all-households-13332429

    I got told I was being “cold” talking about a possible war with Russia (that stung), she seemingly thinks the prospect is much too scary to contemplate, has close relatives in London and because nukes/WW3/Armagedon etc. while I was merely pointing out that European history has never seen a century without at least 2 major conflicts going on at some point. So I never thought it was that likely to start being peaceful in this one. I’m from eastern Europe, she’s from the western part (also not Irish). I think this makes up a lot of the difference.

    80 years of peace and prosperity, and the few generations of people who haven’t lived through a war (even though their parents may have!) seem to live in some kind of an “I’m alright Jack” bubble and are all of a sudden shocked by a prospect of conflict with a country who they can plainly see on the news is on an imperialistic warpath on the continent (as she acknowledges, however the seriousness of the conflict, the bloodbath element of it never truly penetrates through the primary concerns of daily life, family issues, and the general me fein attitude - and this person considers herself to be supremely empathetic, btw).

    It seems that the heartbreaking plight of the Ukranians is something to tsk-tsk about from “far away” watching Sky News, rather than an incentive to stop living in one’s own little bubble and start contemplating that the orange idiot and the KGB murderer are carving up the spoils and readying to wreak more havoc where possible. I do have a problem accepting that denial and “look the other way and maybe it will all go away” mentality are so easily a part of human psyche. I’m no spring chicken and this lady is even older than me. If you want to look at the phenomena of Scholzing, prevarication, indecesiveness in the face of evil, mealy-mouth, half-heart, softly softly approach to issues which really require a robust and quick response, all of which is so pervasive in (Western) Europe and EU in particular, and if you want to know how that happens, this neighbour of mine is a good starting point, she could be anyone’s neighbour and in a way she is. Denial, fear, evasion of uncomfortable facts. God only knows what to then expect of younger generations on these, given certain circumstances come to pass, existential, issues.

    Post edited by seenitall on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,238 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    We really are easy pickings.


    No way to defend ourselves and not aligned with any defense organization.


    Sandwiched between the USA and UK.


    Now Putin knows he can do anything and get away with it since that buffoon has been elected to the White House.


    Very uncertain times for people who don’t have their head buried in the sand.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,646 ✭✭✭zv2


    Saw a political guy on tv recently (forget who he is), said our neutrality is "sacrosanct". Nobody asked why that should be. And why should it be? We can't just live in the past because it worked in the past.

    It looks like history is starting up again.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,842 ✭✭✭macraignil


    As far as I am aware the neutrality took such an unopposed role in the formation of the new Irish state as there had been so many Irish killed fighting in the British armed forces in Wold War One. About 35,000 dead from the approximately 200,000 who served fighting on the continent for the British forces. A very significant number for the population of Ireland which was not at immediate threat of invasion. There was a long history of Irish forming a large portion of British forces when they built up a huge global empire and Ireland was just another colony that did not benefit from the loss of Irish lives fighting for the British authorities.

    I acknowledge your point that this is in the past but from my point of view it is very understandable and I see no issue with us avoiding sending Irish troop to fight on foreign soil. I do have an issue with the government not doing anything about developing drone technology Ireland could use to defend itself and help in conflicts where one side is so deserving of assistance in defending itself like Ukraine is. The related reports on RTE are crying out about lack of people joining the Irish armed forces yet there are no moves by government to utilise new technology that has proved to be so central to fighting in recent and current wars and bring our military forces and in my view very necessary drone production capacity up to date.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,646 ✭✭✭zv2


    True enough. Sending troops abroad is a tricky business, but I'm thinking in terms of self defense. I think it is a bit rich for us to depend on others to defend us when we are adamant that we won't defend them.

    It looks like history is starting up again.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,170 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    Are we not kind of under a NATO umbrella though? I'd imagine Putin would effectively see us as part of NATO…



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,854 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    Unless your in, you're in. We've all seen how useless 'security guarantees' are. I would have doubts about our security and reliability of allies

    Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,226 ✭✭✭yagan


    Just to recap, we were never constitutionally neutral in the Swiss sense, just non aligned in the world that emerged after WWII.

    As cited already many irish volunteered to the great war in response to posters that stated it was an Irish person's duty to defend small nations like Belgium, only for them to survive that hell and come home to see the British burning Irish towns and cities.

    Since brexit the majority of the EU are small nations, so a common defence alignment isn't opposite to our constitution.

    The fear as always is justifiably that we get dragged into illegal wars like the Iraq invasion so even a defence pact that restricts activity to European borders can not guarantee that at some future date an EU member will compromise everyone else with some far flung military adventurism that could endanger all EU citizens.

    While Russia is an existential threat it can't be a pretext for neo European imperialism.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,579 ✭✭✭thatsdaft


    Wake up

    Whatever notions and delusions about the world order you had are gone

    The world we knew has radically changed, Russia, China and now the US have taken a wrecking ball to the structures and institutions and certainties we might have had



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 30,461 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    The fear as always is justifiably that we get dragged into illegal wars like the Iraq invasion

    It's not justifiable in the slightest. It is a complete strawman argument that is somewhere between simple bad faith and nonsensical depending on how it is put forward.

    Nobody got "dragged into" the Iraqi invasion. The Americans and British governments were incredibly gung-ho about it (and it had far more popular support than people are willing to admit to now) and about half of NATO implacably opposed and it caused significant diplomatic ructions.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,436 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    Forgetting about Iraq (you are quite correct to point out NATO members were very divided on that, with France and Germany opposed and catching huge stick over that from supporters of the invasion), I might be overinterpreting, but I think there is a broader point in that post on the risks when you have powerful militaries available as a tool.

    Anyway, we can only deal with what is before us now IMO.

    Europe (and the EU) does need to band together and rapidly arm for its own security in face of Russia, and at best an unreliable and at worst a hostile US (regardless of risks a better armed Europe might pose in future).

    Not doing so could even increase the chance of further wars in Europe when dealing with gamblers like Putin, who are not shy about use of military force when they think it will gain them something.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,356 ✭✭✭thomil


    Russia does see us as part of the “west” and thus as a potentially hostile nation. However, even though we’re right next to a number of NATO countries, it would be foolhardy to expect that we’re under some sort of “extended protection; because of our location. NATO will always prioritise the protection of its member states over that of neighbouring friendly but non-aligned nations like Ireland.

    Then, there’s the question of actual military capability. NATO is often portrayed as a military juggernaut, ironically primarily by individuals or organisations opposed to it, but the fact is that the militaries of many NATO member states have been wound down to barely sustainable levels. Britain is a mere shadow of its former self, with a significant number of Royal Navy vessels laid up and/or decommissioned simply for a lack of crew, its ballistic missile submarines regularly heading out on patrol with only a portion of their missile launch tubes actually loaded, whilst the Royal Air Force is torn in multiple directions at once by conflicting requirements for its combat aircraft. The RAF only recently regained any type of serious maritime patrol capability and its still lacking any Airborne Early Warning abilities, given the decommissioning of the E-3 Sentry and the delays in the delivery of its replacement, the E-7 Wedgetail.

    It’s a similar picture across the alliance. Germany’s deficiencies have been discussed ad nauseam in this thread and its predecessor, and it’s a similar picture for the Netherlands. France looks to be on a more solid footing, but they have global commitments due to their overseas territories, whilst Italy and Spain are located in or near volatile areas whilst at the same time dealing with significant budget constraints. To be perfectly honest, I can’t see how many NATO members could send much our way to protect us in the case of any military conflict involving Ireland, even if they wanted to. And even if NATO a) had the capability to come to Ireland’s assistance if needed and b) had the political will to do so, there’s still the question of time. It would take at best several days to start sending any type of protection force our way, and that’s only once the political decision has been made.

    Good luck trying to figure me out. I haven't managed that myself yet!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,693 ✭✭✭happyoutscan


    We are a lovely stepping stone into Europe.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,159 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Sounds like Ireland came within a whisker of having a cable severed. If anything happens to the gas pipe to the Uk, we are toast, thanks to dimwits like ER and An Bord Pleanála.

    We don't need an LNG plant on the Shannon Estuary, oh no, think of the CO2. This country has way more than it's fair share of mental midgets involved in it's energy infrastructure planning.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,159 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Ukraine is developing a 3,000 km range drone and even a ballistic missile. Put the 1,000 km Neptunes on a ship and Olenya could be in range from the northern Baltic or off the Norwegian coast, but Finland and Norway might not be too keen on them passing through.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,159 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Putrid wants peace piece of you, and you…

    Some speculation another piece he wants is the Svalbard islands.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,646 ✭✭✭zv2


    A Russian ship off the coast of Ireland can pound the centre of Galway city to dust. What happens then? An emergency meeting of the security council? lol.

    It looks like history is starting up again.



Advertisement