War in Ukraine

[Rasputin_Vol]

This is a pre-war assessment assuming the best on the Russian side.

Given the current state of the Russian airforce, navy, and air defense, it is not out of the question that the US/NATO would have complete air superiority over Ukraine within a week with little to no loses. The differences between the two right now are night and day.

No where close to being realistic.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

No, I said in the context of the battlefield there meaning operating under the Ukraine or from the Ukraine that no real weapon systems matter much. The timetable could be impacted.

Sure, if the United States wanted to start WW3 things would change, they would actually become meaningless there. I mean, you could give the Ukraine some nukes but it doesn't change the outcome much. The Ukraine wouldn't be destroyed, it would probably look more like glass.

Not sure what you are getting at.

I doubt any real impact from all of U.S. conventional forces either, meaning, Russia would just increase itself and doesn't have to travel half way around the world to fight. If you think the U.S. can really fight a conventional war on the borders of China or Russia, I think you would be gravely mistaken.

Most of these U.S. systems are borderline worthless in a real war, it really becomes a production war i.e. shells, bullets, bombs, etc. and being able to timely deliver them.

We're talking about dropping millions of tons of arms, to do that you can't be on the other side of the world. This is a tonnage war, a real war is about tonnage. This is a production war to produce the tonnage. To have a real impact on this war, the West would have to have the equivalent of WW2 immobilization, as the Russians would just escalate as well.

The war machine has only started.



The west can delay the time table but that is about all without some of outside factor, if you want to go to nuclear war which is what you are getting at.... I guess that is an option.

I do not understand why these people do not understand logistics. How in the hell are we going to bring enough equipment and manpower to fight Russia head on? How long would it take? And would Russia just allow the US to just stage all of this equipment over months and months? It took ~6 months to mobilize 300k in 1990/1991 Desert Storm.

 

[LSU-SIU]

I do not understand why these people do not understand logistics. How in the hell are we going to bring enough equipment and manpower to fight Russia head on? How long would it take? And would Russia just allow the US to just stage all of this equipment over months and months? It took ~6 months to mobilize 300k in 1990/1991 Desert Storm.

It would take the mobilization of all of the West at WW2 pace or greater to really have any impact. Of course, at that point China, Iran, North Korea, etc. would probably join in. This is kind of futile exercise though.

I couldn't even get parts for a garden tractor. The West is just no longer set up for all this and East own the production. (Oh course, I think this is all a silly exercise. Escalation will most likely involve nuclear, the East isn't going to show up with 10s of millions troops anywhere - too many gay pride parades to attend)

Life as we know it would basically come to an end, even without nuclear war.

They think because they spend $800b a year, that money actually means something. It really doesn't.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

They think because they spend $800b a year, that money actually means something. It really doesn't.

All that money for low volume/high tech weapons that are being taken off the battlefield each day by cheap/simple weapons.

 

[LouderVol]

I do not understand why these people do not understand logistics. How in the hell are we going to bring enough equipment and manpower to fight Russia head on? How long would it take? And would Russia just allow the US to just stage all of this equipment over months and months? It took ~6 months to mobilize 300k in 1990/1991 Desert Storm.

we have been prestaging in Europe for a long time. all those NATO bases house stored weapons, ammo, etc.

Loading…

www.nato.int

23 nations currently on board with pre-development of stockpiles.

New NATO members prompt US Army to revisit 'high north' stock locations - Breaking Defense

The service is also crafting a plan and working the diplomatic channels to gain new agreements for Army prepositioned stock sites in the Indo-Pacific region, said AMC’s Lt. Gen. Christopher Mohan.

breakingdefense.com

new stockpiles (APS) being planned in FInland and Sweden.

we were building up for 6 months because we were starting from nothing in SA. same can not be said for Europe.

There are also all the other local supplies that would be mobilized. so even if it was 6 months for the US, the rest of Europe would still be there.

on the same context it took Russia 8 years to get prepared for Ukraine. how long would they need to really mobilize to fight the west? Their forces in Ukraine clearly are needed to just fight Ukraine, how is Russia going to handle the rest of the border?

 

[LSU-SIU]

All that money for low volume/high tech weapons that are being taken off the battlefield each day by cheap/simple weapons.

There simply is no winning once China enters the picture. Complete banking collapse and all global trade basically come to an end.

There is literally no reason to go to Walmat, as nothing will be there and credit cards don't work.

Everyone loses.

This is a futile exercise.

 

[LSU-SIU]

we have been prestaging in Europe for a long time. all those NATO bases house stored weapons, ammo, etc.

Loading…

www.nato.int

23 nations currently on board with pre-development of stockpiles.

New NATO members prompt US Army to revisit 'high north' stock locations - Breaking Defense

The service is also crafting a plan and working the diplomatic channels to gain new agreements for Army prepositioned stock sites in the Indo-Pacific region, said AMC’s Lt. Gen. Christopher Mohan.

breakingdefense.com

new stockpiles (APS) being planned in FInland and Sweden.

we were building up for 6 months because we were starting from nothing in SA. same can not be said for Europe.

There are also all the other local supplies that would be mobilized. so even if it was 6 months for the US, the rest of Europe would still be there.

on the same context it took Russia 8 years to get prepared for Ukraine. how long would they need to really mobilize to fight the west? Their forces in Ukraine clearly are needed to just fight Ukraine, how is Russia going to handle the rest of the border?

You are over simplifying things. No country really keeps on hand everything that is needed. That is why production is important. Russia hasn't done a full on mobilization. The United States isn't mobilizing millions of people for anything. You can barely get a roofer around here.

Last time I looked the US was having hard time with the goat herders and now the cave dwellers by the red sea. So?

(this is a futile exercise imo)

I'm still trying to figure out how you get the millions of troops to Russia.

 

[BeardedVol]

There simply is no winning once China enters the picture. Complete banking collapse and all global trade basically come to an end.

There is literally no reason to go to Walmat, as nothing will be there and credit cards don't work.

Everyone loses.

This is a futile exercise.

Lol this might be your dumbest take yet.

How exactly is China's economy going to survive if they stop exporting goods?

How exactly is China going to feed its populous since they are a net importer of food?

 

[MG1968]

You are over simplifying things. No country really keeps on hand everything that is needed. That is why production is important. Russia hasn't done a full on mobilization. The United States isn't mobilizing millions of people for anything. You can barely get a roofer around here.

Last time I looked the US was having hard time with the goat herders and now the cave dwellers by the red sea. So?

(this is a futile exercise imo)

And Putin isn’t exactly steamrolling across Ukraine despite all of Russia’s advantages in men, materiel and resources.

And last time I checked, those goat herders kicked Soviet ass, too. Conventional forces are always going to have a hard time against irregular, guerilla-style forces.

 

[RDU VOL#14]

I do not understand why these people do not understand logistics. How in the hell are we going to bring enough equipment and manpower to fight Russia head on? How long would it take? And would Russia just allow the US to just stage all of this equipment over months and months? It took ~6 months to mobilize 300k in 1990/1991 Desert Storm.

I think it largely depends how and why it would start. Everyone saw the invasion of Ukraine months ahead of time and look how that “Special Operation” has worked out . If NATO saw a bunch of Russian divisions building up at staging areas you can be sure that NATO forces would be building up just as quickly. And it’s not the Russian Navy is the Soviet Navy of the 70s and 80s. If this ever moves beyond a proxy war I don’t think WW3 would look the same as WW2, just like WW2 different than the First World War.

 

[LSU-SIU]

And Putin isn’t exactly steamrolling across Ukraine despite all of Russia’s advantages in men, materiel and resources.

And last time I checked, those goat herders kicked Soviet ass, too. Conventional forces are always going to have a hard time against irregular, guerilla-style forces.

I would say it would be a mistake to steamroll, which is why I said at the beginning it could take a decade+. (see my post history from 2022)

But this is all a futile strange exercise.

Goat herders can be difficult now try and imagine all of Russia. I'm not the one that came up with this silly exercise.

This all would end in WW3. Life as you know it would simple disappear. The world functions on a global credit system, once that system disappears billions are going to have to go. No nuclear weapons would be needed.

There is no practical or realistic way of defeating Russia externally meaning through simple military invasion or similar on their home turf. It just doesn't exist. Nobody is going to sacrifice all that.

All the couch warriors make everything sound so easy. Just go over there and take over Russia.

The guy that doesn't want to sign up, is the toughest guy on the block.

 

[BeardedVol]

I would say it would be a mistake to steamroll, which is why I said at the beginning it could take a decade+. (see my post history from 2022)

But this is all a futile strange exercise.

Goat herders can be difficult now try and imagine all of Russia. I'm not the one that came up with this silly exercise.

This all would end in WW3. Life as you know it would simple disappear. The world functions on a global credit system, once that system disappears billions are going to have to go. No nuclear weapons would be needed.

There is no practical or realistic way of defeating Russia externally meaning through simple military invasion or similar on their home turf. It just doesn't exist. Nobody is going to sacrifice all that.

We could have camped out in "goat herder" land until the end of time if we wanted to to keep spending the money to do so.

All the while losing less soldiers per year to enemy action, than we do training exercise accidents.

As has already been stated, we would have zero need to occupy any significant portion of Russia in an armed conflict.

 

[PKT_VOL]

No where close to being realistic.

Feel free to make an argument to the contrary.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Slavyangrad

The commander of the Achilles battalion of the 92nd brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Yuriy Fedorenko, said that in Ukraine it is necessary to make all women liable for military service from the age of 18, on an equal basis with male citizens In addition, according to him, the minimum...

t.me

 

[LSU-SIU]

Slavyangrad

The commander of the Achilles battalion of the 92nd brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Yuriy Fedorenko, said that in Ukraine it is necessary to make all women liable for military service from the age of 18, on an equal basis with male citizens In addition, according to him, the minimum...

t.me

The women and their children need to get out while they still can.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Feel free to make an argument to the contrary.

Like @LSU-SIU said earlier, you will not be fighting The Taliban or some irregular fighters from the sandbox. Russia has air defenses that the US hasn't had to deal with since Vietnam.

 

[PKT_VOL]

I do not understand why these people do not understand logistics. How in the hell are we going to bring enough equipment and manpower to fight Russia head on? How long would it take? And would Russia just allow the US to just stage all of this equipment over months and months? It took ~6 months to mobilize 300k in 1990/1991 Desert Storm.

You say this as if we are pre-invasion and being very generous with possible Russian capabilities. We are long past that point.

 

[PKT_VOL]

Like @LSU-SIU said earlier, you will not be fighting The Taliban or some irregular fighters from the sandbox. Russia has air defenses that the US hasn't had to deal with since Vietnam.

That was a semi-plausible line of reasoning pre-invasion assuming the absolute best of Russian A2/AD. We are long past that point.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Like @LSU-SIU said earlier, you will not be fighting The Taliban or some irregular fighters from the sandbox. Russia has air defenses that the US hasn't had to deal with since Vietnam.

I'm still trying to figure out what this is all about. Is this U.S. v Russia, all the West v Russia. What are the rules?

I mean is the U.S. going to mobilize 40m troops and ship them across the Bering Straits? ON what? Exactly where would all this equipment come from? Some how through magic anti-ship missiles stop working? Realistically there is no real way of mobilizing the force needed by the U.S. in today's world. It simply doesn't exist.

What we are really talking about is mobilization much greater than WW2 and that's if China, and other countries don't enter the fray. The global credit system implodes, Americans will be thinking where their next meal comes from.

Billions of people world wide would have to be liquidated even without nuclear weapons.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Like @LSU-SIU said earlier, you will not be fighting The Taliban or some irregular fighters from the sandbox. Russia has air defenses that the US hasn't had to deal with since Vietnam.

Yeah quoting that smooth brain as some kind of authority didn’t help your stance at all. And likely hurts it frankly

 

[NorthDallas40]

That was a semi-plausible line of reasoning pre-invasion assuming the absolute best of Russian A2/AD. We are long past that point.

There is an entire cadre of intel and ops analysis people trying to convince everyone they are not clueless and incompetent at their jobs these days.

 

[MontyPython]

Putin is clearly rattled by the growing number of countries giving Ukraine the green light to use their weapons provided within Russia proper.

He even directed his lap dog Medvedev to issue "new" threats of nuclear war against Europe and Ukraine.

Good to see our weapons are hurting Russia bigly.

Enjoy Vlad. Make no mistakes, you'll never take Ukraine.

Best be careful, because at some point our government might decide that we'll take our chances on Putin's replacement, and actually let Ukraine win this war.

And, yes, your nuclear war threats are just stupid. By all means, if you'd like to turn Moscow and St. Petersburg to glass, be the ****ing moron who ends it all.

 

[LouderVol]

I'm still trying to figure out what this is all about. Is this U.S. v Russia, all the West v Russia. What are the rules?

I mean is the U.S. going to mobilize 40m troops and ship them across the Bering Straits? ON what? Exactly where would all this equipment come from? Some how through magic anti-ship missiles stop working? Realistically there is no real way of mobilizing the force needed by the U.S. in today's world. It simply doesn't exist.

What we are really talking about is mobilization much greater than WW2 and that's if China, and other countries don't enter the fray. The global credit system implodes, Americans will be thinking where their next meal comes from.

Billions of people world wide would have to be liquidated even without nuclear weapons.

wouldn't need to mobilize like WW2. Russia's army is no where close in size to its WW2 counterpart. Russia and China would face similar collapses.

why would we cross the Bering straight? The main fight would always be on the western front in Europe. there would be naval combat, air raids, and maybe some special forces guerilla style tactics by both sides across the Bering Straight, but no one is going to try and land forces across that.

 

[norrislakevol]

There simply is no winning once China enters the picture. Complete banking collapse and all global trade basically come to an end.

There is literally no reason to go to Walmat, as nothing will be there and credit cards don't work.

Everyone loses.

This is a futile exercise.

It's called mutually assured economical destruction. It's why we are trying to decouple from China.

 

[LSU-SIU]

wouldn't need to mobilize like WW2. Russia's army is no where close in size to its WW2 counterpart. Russia and China would face similar collapses.

why would we cross the Bering straight? The main fight would always be on the western front in Europe. there would be naval combat, air raids, and maybe some special forces guerilla style tactics by both sides across the Bering Straight, but no one is going to try and land forces across that.

Huh, you are saying the U.S. or the West? Your exercise is kind of moronic in nature. Yes, you would need a greater force than WW2 as Russia would begin mobilizing their whole country. What you think you're going to just do that with 100,000 troops, exactly does all the meat come from. Oh, magically stealth planes operating from the United States. That is moronic in a real war son. You're going to need millions of troops to just have an impact in the Ukraine, plus all the equipment you don't have.... and somehow magically get it all over there.

What you are talking about is unrealistic in nature. The United States doesn't have any wonder weapons, never did. Its fiction. The West can't even produce shells. Your military is nothing in a large war, its basically a reserve force. The force is fine, if the goal is to fight goat herders for 20 years and it actually might be okay for a thermonuclear war. It has no ability to rapidly mobilize for a real war with a real opponent.

Jesus. What you are talking about is thermonuclear war.

All of this stuff burns.