War in Ukraine

#76,951
#76,951
PKT_VOL said:
1) It outlines a full Baltic assault; not merely a small land bridge to Kaliningrad. A full Baltic assault is laughable.

2) It didn't begin to address the airpower disparity in such a conflict. Even assuming the absolute best case scenario for a well-learned, adapted, and retooled Russian ground force, NATO airpower would render it a moot point.

3) It doesn't begin to address how decimated the Russian army is. From its officer core, it's best soldiers, it technological edge, etc. simply gone. It will take at least a decade to replace. Throwing 200,000 new warm bodies will not change that in the same way them currently throwing warm bodies is just soaking up time in war of attrition.

4) Giving too much credence to nuclear blackmail from Russia. Russia isn't nuking NATO in an aggression war (outside Russia) against the Baltics. Russia understands that NATO knows that.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. Neither Ukraine or Russia will be able to fight another major war for 10 to 20 years. The losses are just too great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volbound1700 and LouderVol
#76,952
#76,952
PKT_VOL said:
Just take a moment and think this through verse what is asserted.

Readiness for what? For whom?

We have been sending primarily land-based cold-war era military assets to Ukraine. They were designed, built, and paid for to do the exact job they are doing which is defend Europe from Russian aggression.

Our other biggest geopolitical risk is China. Any confrontation with China will be air and sea based; not land based. Sending cold-war era land-based military assets deigned for Russian aggression to thwart Russian aggression in Ukraine does not compromise our "readiness" in any meaningful geopolitical way; quite the opposite actually.

You could easily make an argument that our response to the Israeli-Palatinian conflict effects our geopolitical "readiness" infinitely more due to the nature of a potential conflict in the Pacific and the need to have our naval assets ready and in theater.
Click to expand...
it totally does effect our readiness. we can't replace what we had. If defending one nation against Russia drains us of 10 billion dollars, that they admit so you know its actually more than that, what do you think it will do when we get directly involved with anyone? We aren't starting from a full tank.

I agree China is the main geopolitical threat, which means giving stuff to fight the Russians gives us no return value when it comes to China. those weapons would be just as effective against China as it is against Russia so don't knock it because its old. And our allies in the Pacific are going to be even less prepared than Ukraine was. they are going to need arms to fight the Chinese too. this is the price of making ourselves the world's police, very few nations are going to have the capability of defending themselves.

if nothing else supplying Ukraine is working our logistics. we only have so many heavy lifters capable of moving military equipment around. who knows what percentage is tied up in Europe right now. not just supplying Ukraine, but also our own troops and any of the NATO forces. those will be even more critical in the Pacific having to island hop.

if one ground war we aren't directly involved in against not our biggest can drain at least 10 billion of assets, what do you think a war we are actually involved in against our biggest foe is going to do?
 
#76,953
#76,953
www.forbes.com

It’s True. The Russian Army Attacked Ukrainian Positions In Open-Top Golf Carts.

It’s reckless, if not insane, to deploy an open-top, unarmored all-terrain vehicle—a heavy-duty golf cart—in combat just a quarter mile from the the front line.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

click bait a bit, ATVs are more than golf carts, but still not suitable for combat.

Russians showing wear now too in the equipment department. Having to use unarmored ATVs near the front lines, also gutted T62s, as troop transport. I know our special operation guys have/use ATV equivalents too. but these are straight civilian grade ATVs. and these aren't special operators using them to zip around between hot locations.

either side pretending this isn't effecting the combat capabilities of all involved isn't paying attention.
 
#76,954
#76,954
LouderVol said:
it totally does effect our readiness. we can't replace what we had. If defending one nation against Russia drains us of 10 billion dollars, that they admit so you know its actually more than that, what do you think it will do when we get directly involved with anyone? We aren't starting from a full tank.

I agree China is the main geopolitical threat, which means giving stuff to fight the Russians gives us no return value when it comes to China. those weapons would be just as effective against China as it is against Russia so don't knock it because its old. And our allies in the Pacific are going to be even less prepared than Ukraine was. they are going to need arms to fight the Chinese too. this is the price of making ourselves the world's police, very few nations are going to have the capability of defending themselves.

if nothing else supplying Ukraine is working our logistics. we only have so many heavy lifters capable of moving military equipment around. who knows what percentage is tied up in Europe right now. not just supplying Ukraine, but also our own troops and any of the NATO forces. those will be even more critical in the Pacific having to island hop.

if one ground war we aren't directly involved in against not our biggest can drain at least 10 billion of assets, what do you think a war we are actually involved in against our biggest foe is going to do?
Click to expand...

China has a MAJOR headache called India though. Every time China builds a major warship, India matches. The two are in a minor cold war right now. It doesn't help that China also has pissed off Vietnam and the Philippines. Add in South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan, China is basically surrounded on 3 sides by enemies.
 
#76,955
#76,955
As much as Ras, Putin, and Company want to tout China, they don't realize how many enemies around China that they are and how China is losing ground to these other Asian-Pacific nations. China's biggest mistake was getting India angry at them. India was, initially, seeking friendly relationships with PRC but the two got in a border dispute (which is still ongoing) over basically useless Mountain regions.

India, today, as more population than China and is a faster growing economy.

Indonesia is another major economic threat. No one pays attention to this Island Nation but it has one of the largest populations in the world at over 270 Million people and has a growing economy.

The cheap manufacturing labor is moving from China to nations like Thailand, Vietnam, India, Indonesia, and Mexico who are far more Western-friendly and business-friendly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volsdeep4
#76,959
#76,959
LouderVol said:
it totally does effect our readiness. we can't replace what we had. If defending one nation against Russia drains us of 10 billion dollars, that they admit so you know its actually more than that, what do you think it will do when we get directly involved with anyone? We aren't starting from a full tank.

I agree China is the main geopolitical threat, which means giving stuff to fight the Russians gives us no return value when it comes to China. those weapons would be just as effective against China as it is against Russia so don't knock it because its old. And our allies in the Pacific are going to be even less prepared than Ukraine was. they are going to need arms to fight the Chinese too. this is the price of making ourselves the world's police, very few nations are going to have the capability of defending themselves.

if nothing else supplying Ukraine is working our logistics. we only have so many heavy lifters capable of moving military equipment around. who knows what percentage is tied up in Europe right now. not just supplying Ukraine, but also our own troops and any of the NATO forces. those will be even more critical in the Pacific having to island hop.

if one ground war we aren't directly involved in against not our biggest can drain at least 10 billion of assets, what do you think a war we are actually involved in against our biggest foe is going to do?
Click to expand...

Any US v China war will ignite the entire region so I agree it is ludicrous to think our aid to Ukraine isn't harming the reediness of our and our pacific/Asian allies.
 
#76,961
#76,961
volbound1700 said:
China has a MAJOR headache called India though. Every time China builds a major warship, India matches. The two are in a minor cold war right now. It doesn't help that China also has pissed off Vietnam and the Philippines. Add in South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan, China is basically surrounded on 3 sides by enemies.
Click to expand...
thats a lot of people we are going to have to arm. except for South Korea all of those are reliant on imports.

Even India is having to import a lot of arms. Ironically going back to the subject matter of this thread, India's main source of imports was Russia. And over the last year Russia has had to decrease their shipments despite payment time and again to the point where they have fully stopped exporting to India.

if we can't arm a nation of 40 million fighting a nation of 140 million, how are we going to arm nations of 97 million, 113 million, 23 million, 1.4 BILLION, and 125 million fighting against a nation of 1.4 billion?

if china goes hot everyone also know they are going to drag at least North Korea into it too.
 
#76,962
#76,962
volbound1700 said:
As much as Ras, Putin, and Company want to tout China, they don't realize how many enemies around China that they are and how China is losing ground to these other Asian-Pacific nations. China's biggest mistake was getting India angry at them. India was, initially, seeking friendly relationships with PRC but the two got in a border dispute (which is still ongoing) over basically useless Mountain regions.

India, today, as more population than China and is a faster growing economy.

Indonesia is another major economic threat. No one pays attention to this Island Nation but it has one of the largest populations in the world at over 270 Million people and has a growing economy.

The cheap manufacturing labor is moving from China to nations like Thailand, Vietnam, India, Indonesia, and Mexico who are far more Western-friendly and business-friendly.
Click to expand...
if the bolded is a setback for China in a major war, the same is true for Russia.

Europe has passed Russia except when it comes to fuel production. and this war against Ukraine has unified Europe against Russia, drawing long time neutrals into NATO. even some of the central asian 'stans have pushed back against Russia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volbound1700
#76,963
#76,963
LouderVol said:
thats a lot of people we are going to have to arm. except for South Korea all of those are reliant on imports.

Even India is having to import a lot of arms. Ironically going back to the subject matter of this thread, India's main source of imports was Russia. And over the last year Russia has had to decrease their shipments despite payment time and again to the point where they have fully stopped exporting to India.

if we can't arm a nation of 40 million fighting a nation of 140 million, how are we going to arm nations of 97 million, 113 million, 23 million, 1.4 BILLION, and 125 million fighting against a nation of 1.4 billion?

if china goes hot everyone also know they are going to drag at least North Korea into it too.
Click to expand...

I doubt China starts a war to be honest. Also, India won't go to war with China unless directly attacked. However, India still exists as a threat so China will have to keep troops on the border even if they fought someone else. That is India's real value in that they divert Chinese forces to watch them.

Why would we have to arm these nations? Out of the group that I listed, the only ones we are truly allied with are Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the Philippines. There is something in place with Vietnam and Thailand is a traditional ally as well. We don't have an obligation to any other countries outside of those listed (and Australia and New Zealand).

Indonesia, India, etc. are on their own.
 
#76,964
#76,964
LouderVol said:
if the bolded is a setback for China in a major war, the same is true for Russia.

Europe has passed Russia except when it comes to fuel production. and this war against Ukraine has unified Europe against Russia, drawing long time neutrals into NATO. even some of the central asian 'stans have pushed back against Russia.
Click to expand...

Agree, China and Russia are making MORE enemies rather than building allies. this is why their soft power is weak. They do have North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran so I guess they have that.
 
#76,966
#76,966
volbound1700 said:
I doubt China starts a war to be honest. Also, India won't go to war with China unless directly attacked. However, India still exists as a threat so China will have to keep troops on the border even if they fought someone else. That is India's real value in that they divert Chinese forces to watch them.

Why would we have to arm these nations? Out of the group that I listed, the only ones we are truly allied with are Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the Philippines. There is something in place with Vietnam and Thailand is a traditional ally as well. We don't have an obligation to any other countries outside of those listed (and Australia and New Zealand).

Indonesia, India, etc. are on their own.
Click to expand...
We don't have an alliance with Ukraine either.

and again you are holding a different standard between Russia and China. you claim Russia is planning on attacking the west after defeating Ukraine, or at least defeating Ukraine makes it more likely. But they have pulled off troops for their borders with NATO. but in this thread you say China will have to defend its border with India even if not fighting them.

both Japan and the Philippines have three times the population of Ukraine. The Japanese also have a huge age demographic problem. meaning we aren't going to be able to count on them for a whole lot of fighting to offset our own needs. unless they really have Godzilla or Gundams to fight for them.
 
#76,967
#76,967
LouderVol said:
We don't have an alliance with Ukraine either.

and again you are holding a different standard between Russia and China. you claim Russia is planning on attacking the west after defeating Ukraine, or at least defeating Ukraine makes it more likely. But they have pulled off troops for their borders with NATO. but in this thread you say China will have to defend its border with India even if not fighting them.

both Japan and the Philippines have three times the population of Ukraine. The Japanese also have a huge age demographic problem. meaning we aren't going to be able to count on them for a whole lot of fighting to offset our own needs. unless they really have Godzilla or Gundams to fight for them.
Click to expand...

I think you are mixing me up with another poster. I don't think Russia is going to attack anyone after Ukraine because they will be too banged up to do it. Now do they have the "desire"? Sure. If they go anywhere, I think Moldovia would be next followed by Caucasus. Putin is not stupid and wouldn't mess with NATO nations like in the Baltic.
 
Last edited:
#76,968
#76,968
norrislakevol said:
I agree with this. Neither Ukraine or Russia will be able to fight another major war for 10 to 20 years. The losses are just too great.
Click to expand...
If Russia is so depleted, then why are we still getting these scarry narratives about Russia marching to The Baltics, Warsaw, etc?

You can't have it both ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol and volbound1700
#76,969
#76,969
Rasputin_Vol said:
If Russia is so depleted, then why are we still getting these scarry narratives about Russia marching to The Baltics, Warsaw, etc?

You can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

Because the ones spouting those narrative a A) idiots and/or B) think it helps their political tribe.
 
#76,970
#76,970
Rasputin_Vol said:
If Russia is so depleted, then why are we still getting these scarry narratives about Russia marching to The Baltics, Warsaw, etc?

You can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

I agree. The Baltic stuff seems like scare tactics. I mean, don't get me wrong, Russia maybe doing espionage mess there as a distraction or for a variety of reasons but I doubt the Baltics are under any serious threat of invasion.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top