Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Russian Invasion of Ukraine

PleaseBlitz

By PleaseBlitz
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, TradeTheBeal! said:

Lol…tanks.  What is this, 1960?

What

i believe the main ground force for us in the beginning of the iraq invasion was tanks

 

have you not seen what our tanks can do? It’s insane how far they can fire, how accurately, while cruising at 60 mph over bumpy terrain. 
 

yeah dude tanks. War. Tanks. 
 

we also still use planes and guns. :) 

Edited by tshile
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captain Wiggles

Captain Wiggles

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, tshile said:

I was reading a write up on Ukrainian tanks vs Russian tanks. 
 

basically Ukrainian tanks are mostly old tech mothballed from the Soviet era. 
 

and the writer basically said:

few Ukrainian tanks will fire a shot before being destroy by their Russian counter-parts. 
 

Iraq had a lot of tanks too. They were old and didn’t fair well either. 

 

That's why I asked the other day if the Russians had deployed any T 14 tanks. It's sposidly faster than the M 1 Abrams, similar firepower, n operates with a three man crew.

 

My money would still be on the Abrams as Russia has struggled to find funds to build their "next generation" tank. 🤓

Link to comment
Share on other sites
megared

megared

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

B61s (bombs not missiles) have been part of our nuclear sharing program for years.  And note, none of those countries are part of the more recent NATO expansion.

 

Also, I don't think there is a current treaty to be in violation of with respect to land based missiles.  Both us and Russia withdrew from the INF years ago.  With both sides saying the other had violated it and not happy that other people hadn't signed (especially China for us and other NATO countries for Russia).  But even that wasn't related to nuclear weapons for us.  Russia wasn't happy with our development of drones claiming they were essentially achieved the same objective as missiles.  

 

Sharing nuclear bombs and aircraft to deliver them under the deal isn't anything new and it has known about the Russians since they have been the Soviets.  It is something we do to keep European states from developing their own nuclear weapons.  And we haven't added any of the newer NATO countries to the list of countries we share them with.

 

 

 

Putin's problem is the missile launchers moving closer and closer to their border via NATO's expansion.  So saying NATO expanding east poses no threat to Russia just isn't true, even if it's not the intention.   It's not a new position, it's not a secret, and Putin's been pretty consistent on it.  

 

If we're being honest it never made much sense to expand NATO (in the 90's) after the Soviet Union collapsed...IMO it planted the seeds for this conflict, and others.  

  • Like 2
  • Thumb down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NickyJ

NickyJ

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, tshile said:

What

i believe the main ground force for us in the beginning of the iraq invasion was tanks

 

have you not seen what our tanks can do? It’s insane how far they can fire, how accurately, while cruising at 60 mph over bumpy terrain. 
 

yeah dude tanks. War. Tanks. 
 

we also still use planes and guns. :) 

Tanks go "pew". Jets go "brrrt". "brrrt" wins over "pew" every time.

 

What does a tank commander say when he sees a jet? "Aw ****". What does a jet pilot say when he sees a tank? "Aw sweet". I'm taking the death machine hurtling through the sky at hundreds of miles power hour while towing along rockets that can level entire building complexes over a tank with a hole puncher of a gun.

Edited by NickyJ
  • Haha 2
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

Tanks go "pew". Jets go "brrrt". "brrrt" wins over "pew" every time.


As I understand it, some of the tanks go "brrrt", too. 
 

Far from an expert. But as I understand it, there's things like a CIWS, on treads. It's job is to protect a group of tanks or things, from things that fly. 
 

And yes, no doubt our pilots have spent time training in techniques that we think will defeat those. But how many others have that level of training?  (And, will our training work, in practice?)

 

Just advising against blanket declarations about winning every time. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, megared said:

 

If we're being honest it never made much sense to expand NATO (in the 90's) after the Soviet Union collapsed...IMO it planted the seeds for this conflict, and others.  

That’s what I was getting at earlier. 
 

the whole “standing up for peoples right to select their government” thing sounds awesome but it’s a guise. 
 

It was a power play. 
 

Spreading democracy is the extra thing that’s nice but doesn’t matter. 
 

we have enough relationships with enough of certain types of people, our agencies have a history of doing enough of certain types of things, that I’m just not accepting that the core motive for expanding nato was because we so deeply care about the human rights issues around the world. 
 

and we could go on for pages about the stuff our corporations have done overseas that we turn a blind eye to. 

As awful as what Putin is doing (I generally just consider ruling people by force to be truly awful) - I get it. It doesn’t seem difficult to understand. 
 

the Cold War never ended. I suppose that’s really what Putin’s “self proclaimed winners” comment was about. 

 

9 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

Tanks go "pew". Jets go "brrrt". "brrrt" wins over "pew" every time.

 

What does a tank commander say when he sees a jet? "Aw ****". What does a jet pilot say when he sees a tank? "Aw sweet". I'm taking the death machine hurtling through the sky at hundreds of miles power hour while towing along rockets that can level entire building complexes over a tank with a hole puncher of a gun.

😂

of course. 
 

it should be noted that before we sent the tanks in, we dismantled their air defense capabilities and general communications infrastructure. Using, among many things that travel by air, planes. 
 

the point is that if you’re gonna need a ground presence, you are going to, in some part, need and use tanks. 
 

and you’ll have to deal with the fact that the other guy also has and uses tanks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterMP

PeterMP

Posted
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, megared said:

 

Putin's problem is the missile launchers moving closer and closer to their border via NATO's expansion.  So saying NATO expanding east poses no threat to Russia just isn't true, even if it's not the intention.   It's not a new position, it's not a secret, and Putin's been pretty consistent on it.  

 

If we're being honest it never made much sense to expand NATO (in the 90's) after the Soviet Union collapsed...IMO it planted the seeds for this conflict, and others.  

 

Your initial post made a comparison between the Soviet Union's attempt to put nuclear missiles in Cuba and NATO expansion.  There is no real comparison.  NATO expansion has not come with an expansion of our nuclear weapons systems and especially not nuclear missiles.  Our nuclear missile system is now further from Russia's border than it was at the time of the Cuban missile crisis.

 

What we're moving closer to Russia is really missiles that are part of an anti-missile/air craft defense system.

 

It made sense to expand because those countries worried about their security and they were new democratic regimes that needed support.  We expanded because those countries WANTED to join NATO.

 

Poland, Estonia, etc, didn't want to join NATO for no reason and our reasons for letting them join are the same reason they wanted to join.

 

To protect them from Russian aggression and Russian attempts to control and subjugate them as it was doing to Chechnya at the time that we opened expansion up to them.

 

Those countries didn't just say hey we want to join NATO and we didn't just say yes hey why not.  Russian actions lead to NATO expansion.

Edited by PeterMP
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TradeTheBeal!

TradeTheBeal!

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, megared said:

 

Putin's problem is the missile launchers moving closer and closer to their border via NATO's expansion.  So saying NATO expanding east poses no threat to Russia just isn't true, even if it's not the intention.   It's not a new position, it's not a secret, and Putin's been pretty consistent on it.  

 

If we're being honest it never made much sense to expand NATO (in the 90's) after the Soviet Union collapsed...IMO it planted the seeds for this conflict, and others.  


The seeds of the conflict were planted when Putin slaughtered all his political opposition and independent journalists and became completely corrupted by power…and you might wanna take his balls outta your mouth, soon.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RansomthePasserby

RansomthePasserby

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, tshile said:

I was reading a write up on Ukrainian tanks vs Russian tanks. 
 

basically Ukrainian tanks are mostly old tech mothballed from the Soviet era. 
 

and the writer basically said:

few Ukrainian tanks will fire a shot before being destroy by their Russian counter-parts. 


Which is why the Ukrainian’s probably have a better chance if they rely on their anti-tank infantry, which is one of the advantages of being the defender. Conceal, shoot, and gtfo. 

  • Like 2
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...