User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
MN, USA
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 8:49:32 AM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: I think if you really wanted to you could make a B-61 fly like this, but the system is really for turning cheap 500 lb bombs into guided cruise missiles. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FdTC87jUUAA4ldR?format=jpg&name=large Can it carry a nuke? I think if you really wanted to you could make a B-61 fly like this, but the system is really for turning cheap 500 lb bombs into guided cruise missiles. When does the requirements shift from a 200lb bomb to a 500lb? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 8:50:27 AM EST
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: I'm only asking because I'm thinking about the future when Ukraine "may" have nukes and certainly DOES have a delivery system. Just something to cool the Russian heels. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: I think if you really wanted to you could make a B-61 fly like this, but the system is really for turning cheap 500 lb bombs into guided cruise missiles. I'm only asking because I'm thinking about the future when Ukraine "may" have nukes and certainly DOES have a delivery system. Just something to cool the Russian heels. That's easy, just ask the Ukrainians if they would host our outdated stealth nuclear cruise missiles.   
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 8:50:51 AM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Although I do question Chuck's maps showing with any real accuracy where the Ukrainian forces are, his claims of killed vehicles and aircraft do come directly from either Operational Command South or East and other sources I have learned to trust, and so the info tends to be accurate on that count. I think as you do, right now there is a lot of stuff to hit in the South, but Ukraine can sort of slow roll for now and pummel major Russian forces trapped in that area until sufficiently weakened, they then could suddenly make an offensive to take Kherson at some point. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By Mal_means_bad: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: The movement of numerous S-300 systems from Russia and Syria like you said is another indicator that losses of these big systems might be more substantial than we've been hearing about. Do we think that the Ukrainians have been delayed just by good defenses and allocation of resources north or are they intentionally slow rolling the Kherson offensive? They have local air and artillery superiority now and the river means that Russia can only trickle equipment to their guys in plain view. Sounds like a shooting gallery. If they don't throw human waves into frontal assaults they should be able to rack up a very favorable ratio of losses just sitting there, and fighting in the city itself will be a bastard, so I wonder if they might prefer to stretch those circumstances out. Although I do question Chuck's maps showing with any real accuracy where the Ukrainian forces are, his claims of killed vehicles and aircraft do come directly from either Operational Command South or East and other sources I have learned to trust, and so the info tends to be accurate on that count. I think as you do, right now there is a lot of stuff to hit in the South, but Ukraine can sort of slow roll for now and pummel major Russian forces trapped in that area until sufficiently weakened, they then could suddenly make an offensive to take Kherson at some point. I've thought for a bit that Ukraine wants to avoid a reverse Mariupol in Kherson (an urban battle that they ultimately win, but is very time consuming, results in heavy casualties, and the city getting leveled). I feel that this is why they've been hammering their logistics for months with HIMARS, letting their morale slowly degrade, etc. They want the Russian forces in Kherson to eventually collapse, that way they don't have to risk a reverse Mariupol. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 8:53:55 AM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: If Steven Segal gets the call, we/UA are fucked. I've seen him do some shit... Given his current size, Steven Seagal needs a mobility scooter before he can be mobilized. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 8:53:59 AM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bikedamon: Is there word of Ukraine getting those? Holy crap, that would be an even bigger game changer than the HIMARs have been. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bikedamon: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FdTC87jUUAA4ldR?format=jpg&name=large Is there word of Ukraine getting those? Holy crap, that would be an even bigger game changer than the HIMARs have been. I honestly don't know. Getting these things flight rated on specific air frames takes time. They are somewhat stealthy weapons, but not like a JASSM where we might be worried about tipping our hand to our true capabilities, I'm wondering if they can be ground launched too. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:01:38 AM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: If Steven Segal gets the call, we/UA are fucked. I've seen him do some shit... Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: I'm waiting to see if they mobilize Patrick Lancaster. If Steven Segal gets the call, we/UA are fucked. I've seen him do some shit... I consider Segal a traitor and Russian mouthpiece now. I have utter contempt for him. |
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:02:08 AM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By K0UA: The biggest perk was with the bribe saying they served, they got that year of their life to do with as they pleased on the front end and did not have to serve even though the records say they did. But now on the tail end with the mobilization thing they are really screwed because they don't even have the rudimentary experience they should have from having recently served in the military. Ooops. What do you mean you don't know how to field strip the Kalashnikov? A lot of Russian Drill Sergeants will be losing their voices with those recruits. Maybe just go straight to the rape and let their future units worry about proficiency. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:05:23 AM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Mal_means_bad: If my job was to destabilize Russia I'd mail mobilization summons to another million guys at random. Mail all of the Babushkas that every male age 13 and up in their family is to report to red square for mobilization. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:06:42 AM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Mal_means_bad: If my job was to destabilize Russia I'd mail mobilization summons to another million guys at random. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:07:37 AM EST
[Last Edit: dillydilly]
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MostlyPeaceful: @dillydilly My screen name checks out in a way you will never know. So we have your avatar and claimed nationality as Ukraine. St Javelin and all. Super dooper patriotic. And you have cousins who are not willing to fight. So that makes your family not just dependent on others but actually insistent that others go and defend them. And they don't have the decency to get the fuck out of there so real Ukrainians won't be burdened by them. I can't come up with any religion that prohibits fighting or violence in defense of the family and homeland. Some sects do seem to prohibit expansionist warfare. So cowards is all I can come up with. I have no sympathy towards cowards and those who support their actions. There are things I would call you right now that would get me banned so I’ll restrain because you’re a typical smug and ignorant wannabe tough guy who thinks he knows everything. All you know of Ukraine, this war, or the people affected by it is what you read online. I never said they weren’t willing to fight, just don’t want to because of their pacifism. The only coward here is you sir. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:08:00 AM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: A lot of Russian Drill Sergeants will be losing their voices with those recruits. Maybe just go straight to the rape and let their future units worry about proficiency. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:08:52 AM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Mal_means_bad: If my job was to destabilize Russia I'd mail mobilization summons to another million guys at random. Mail them to children, old women, and the disabled |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:11:02 AM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AROKIE: not really, when used in firebases like we did in afghanistan that covered an AO, towed artillery worked perfect. But if you are moving frontlines and shooting and moving then mobile artillery is King. An army needs both to be effective Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AROKIE: Originally Posted By fadedsun: Originally Posted By Cypher15: The amount of shoot and scoot in this war is going to make SPG development and deploy go WAY up. Towed howitzers are dinosaurs not really, when used in firebases like we did in afghanistan that covered an AO, towed artillery worked perfect. But if you are moving frontlines and shooting and moving then mobile artillery is King. An army needs both to be effective I've been wondering about the advantages/disadvantages of towed vs self propelled artillery. Seems like there's a place for both. I could even make an argument for mortar tubes (with drone surveillance), but I just don't see how the volley fired auto grenade launcher is effective. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:14:44 AM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: I honestly don't know. Getting these things flight rated on specific air frames takes time. They are somewhat stealthy weapons, but not like a JASSM where we might be worried about tipping our hand to our true capabilities, I'm wondering if they can be ground launched too. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By bikedamon: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FdTC87jUUAA4ldR?format=jpg&name=large Is there word of Ukraine getting those? Holy crap, that would be an even bigger game changer than the HIMARs have been. I honestly don't know. Getting these things flight rated on specific air frames takes time. They are somewhat stealthy weapons, but not like a JASSM where we might be worried about tipping our hand to our true capabilities, I'm wondering if they can be ground launched too. I believe you are correct, even older items like TLAM we probably don’t want to turn over wholly. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:15:30 AM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fadedsun: Mail them to children, old women, and the disabled Its most important to mail them to every male. This will keep the paperwork side in chaos trying to straighten it out. Then Russia will do what it does best and suffer from corruption. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:20:14 AM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By stone-age: It's a good video. It's one of the many things that started convincing me they really are not like us. They think in ways that we honestly think don't make sense. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By stone-age: Originally Posted By Stevo89: This video does a good job of explaining why Russians are the way they are. Pretty much impossible to unfuck them.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8ZqBLcIvw0It's a good video. It's one of the many things that started convincing me they really are not like us. They think in ways that we honestly think don't make sense. Patton understood this 8 decades ago. We should have listened to Patton. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:20:32 AM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
 Attached File
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:20:34 AM EST
[#18]
Since the USA is gifting weapons to the Ukrainian army why don't we send a few cruise missiles deep behind the Russian lines to target those train depots where fresh recruits and tanks are being shipped.
We could "gift" these weapons to Ukraine right after they are launched toward their targets.  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:22:26 AM EST
[#19]
|
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:26:46 AM EST
[#20]
I wonder if they end up amputating that, looks like its totally atrophied. Tough SOB.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:32:03 AM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Easterner: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/526834/IMG_20220923_110347_jpg-2536035.JPG Oh yeah  MORE PLEASE. Send the G*d damn ATACMS, plane loads of them now. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:33:50 AM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Alphascout: I wonder if they end up amputating that, looks like its totally atrophied. Tough SOB. I read that they couldn't set it properly and the russians didn't give any medical care so there's a 4cm gap (4cm of missing bone is how the post translates) in the arm. He also got shot in both legs. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:38:20 AM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ryandushku: https://media4.giphy.com/media/7rQSSmxalNtfy/giphy.gif?cid=5e2148861f2q3h5pujx6zn9a8bha9eiqp5zruyta0v5mgt0i&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ryandushku: Originally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: If Steven Segal gets the call, we/UA are fucked. I've seen him do some shit... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:39:52 AM EST
[#24]
"Exhumation of bodies from the mass burial in Izyum is being completed today. A total of 436 bodies were exhumed. Most of them have signs of violent death, and 30 have traces of torture, Oleg Sinegubov, head of Kharkiv OVA
There are bodies with ropes around their necks, with bound hands, with broken limbs and gunshot wounds. Several men have amputated genitalia. All this is evidence of the terrible tortures that the occupiers subjected the residents of Izyum to. Most of the bodies are civilians, 21 are military."  Attached File |
|
|
|
IL, USA
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:39:58 AM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sq40: Russia, if it were smart, would train and equip the bulk of the new mobilization troops up and stage another invasion force. Then use tactical nukes on major Ukrainian cities. Then send in the troops to mop up and take the country. Just feeding the grinder is a loser for them.  If they use a tactical nuke, the gloves come off and NATO goes in balls deep....hard....and dry. Plus, would you want to be a trooper being sent into a country with radiation everywhere? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:40:18 AM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By stgdz: When does the requirements shift from a 200lb bomb to a 500lb? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By stgdz: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FdTC87jUUAA4ldR?format=jpg&name=large Can it carry a nuke? I think if you really wanted to you could make a B-61 fly like this, but the system is really for turning cheap 500 lb bombs into guided cruise missiles. When does the requirements shift from a 200lb bomb to a 500lb? Depends on how much you want to destroy the target and how many weapons you want to allot to that target. There is a 2,000 lb model with a guidance kit for anti ship work. Called "Quicksink" |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:41:52 AM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By trapsh00ter99: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/184365/973110B6-379C-4DE8-BED6-890EB5A354FD-2536213.png |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:42:57 AM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Stevo89: This video does a good job of explaining why Russians are the way they are. Pretty much impossible to unfuck them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8ZqBLcIvw0this is great. thank you. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:43:19 AM EST
[#29]
|
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:43:35 AM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MostlyPeaceful: @dillydilly My screen name checks out in a way you will never know. So we have your avatar and claimed nationality as Ukraine. St Javelin and all. Super dooper patriotic. And you have cousins who are not willing to fight. So that makes your family not just dependent on others but actually insistent that others go and defend them. And they don't have the decency to get the fuck out of there so real Ukrainians won't be burdened by them. I can't come up with any religion that prohibits fighting or violence in defense of the family and homeland. Some sects do seem to prohibit expansionist warfare. So cowards is all I can come up with. I have no sympathy towards cowards and those who support their actions. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MostlyPeaceful: Originally Posted By dillydilly: Originally Posted By MostlyPeaceful: Are those Ukrainian cousins unwilling to fight for their homeland? I don't understand your post. Screename checks out. 🙄 They’re deeply religious and their beliefs prevent them from taking another life. Besides, I don’t want them to die. They don’t wanna die. What’s not to understand? I don’t necessarily agree with their beliefs when it comes to the defense of their nation but this isn’t a game. They haven’t fled like so many others have. They are still there hoping and praying all of this comes to a quick end. If they get called, they’ll go. One dictators actions have led to so much death and destruction. Just keeps adding to it with these latest developments. Originally Posted By AROKIE: Your cousins are not already fighting?? If they are of fighting age why are they not already in the service? You clearly don’t have the entire grasp on how things work over there. They reside in the western part country. UAF doesn’t call everyone up. They call them based on where they live amongst other things. @dillydilly My screen name checks out in a way you will never know. So we have your avatar and claimed nationality as Ukraine. St Javelin and all. Super dooper patriotic. And you have cousins who are not willing to fight. So that makes your family not just dependent on others but actually insistent that others go and defend them. And they don't have the decency to get the fuck out of there so real Ukrainians won't be burdened by them. I can't come up with any religion that prohibits fighting or violence in defense of the family and homeland. Some sects do seem to prohibit expansionist warfare. So cowards is all I can come up with. I have no sympathy towards cowards and those who support their actions. Nice trolling. A little backstory; I grew up in Eastern Ohio, around 30 or so miles from the WV line (aka "The Ohio River"). There, you get some of the most Patriotic hillbillies you've ever seen, who are the descendants of people who fought honorably in every conflict this country has ever fought (in a few notable conflicts, on both sides). There are locations you literally can't swing a dead cat without hitting a veteran. We also have a crapton of Amish and Mennonites. I can't think of anyone from there who has been in combat that believes drafting the Amish/Mennonites, or other religious pacifists, into combat (other than as a few medical people and such) is remotely a good idea or even a particularly just one. Just keep making and sending the old-school cheese, preserves, and trail bologna to the front, and do a good job on the framing, roof, the kitchen cabinets and the new furniture when I remodel/build my house when I get home. If you are drafting folks constitutionally unsuitable for combat (who will be a drag on the war effort as soldiers) as combat troops to be self-propelled pop-up targets, you are doing it wrong. This is what the Orcs are doing, and exactly what the Ukes are fighting not to become. Besides, logistics wins wars, and you can't draft Everyone or you crash the economy, and one cannot field a modern Army fighting a high-intensity war without a functioning economy. Yes, you need trigger-pullers, but equally important to the overall war effort are folks growing food, repairing the road/rail networks, and just generally keeping the lights on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:44:41 AM EST
[#31]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:45:39 AM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dillydilly: There are things I would call you right now that would get me banned so I’ll restrain because you’re a typical smug and ignorant wannabe tough guy who thinks he knows everything. All you know of Ukraine, this war, or the people affected by it is what you read online. I never said they weren’t willing to fight, just don’t want to because of their pacifism. The only coward here is you sir. Why did you even bring it up? EVERYONE with family in Ukraine is worried. You’re, intentionally or not, doing a great job of painting your cousins in a bad light. I’m going to assume that they are busy doing their best to support those around them to the best of their abilities, and, should it come to it, that they can serve in some kind of conscious objector support role. |
|
|
|
WY, USA
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:47:14 AM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By panthermark: If they use a tactical nuke, the gloves come off and NATO goes in balls deep....hard....and dry. Plus, would you want to be a trooper being sent into a country with radiation everywhere? Lol NATO won't do shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:47:28 AM EST
[#34]
They don't want to run over the pig with her little piglets with the captured Russian tank.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:48:42 AM EST
[#35]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:49:00 AM EST
[#36]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:49:03 AM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sq40: Atlantic Counsel Memo to the President: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/content-series/memo-to-the-president/memo-to-the-president-how-to-deter-russian-nuclear-use-in-ukraine-and-respond-if-deterrence-fails/ TO: POTUS FROM: Matthew Kroenig SUBJECT: How to deter Russian nuclear use in Ukraine and respond if deterrence fails What does the US president need to know? Our new "memo to the president" series has the answer with briefings on the world's most pressing issues from our experts, drawing on their experience advising the highest levels of government. Bottom line up front: Russia might use nuclear weapons to achieve its goals in the war in Ukraine a risk that has only grown as Russian forces confront Ukrainian counteroffensives. Such nuclear use could advance the Kremlin's military aims, undermine US interests globally, and set off a humanitarian catastrophe unseen since 1945. To deter such a potential disaster, the United States should issue public, deliberately vague threats of serious consequences for any Russian use of nuclear weapons and be prepared to follow through with conventional military strikes on Russian forces if deterrence fails. Background: Russian nuclear use in Ukraine is possible and would be detrimental to US interests Following Russia's further invasion of Ukraine this year, the United States and its allies and partners have responded with military aid to Ukraine, sanctions on the Russian economy, and reinforcements to NATO's eastern flank. To date, the United States and its allies have ruled out direct military intervention against Russia. Nuclear threats are core to Russia's military strategy, and there is a nonzero chance that Russian President Vladimir Putin will order a nuclear strike on Ukraine. Russia's so-called "escalate-to-de-escalate" strategy calls for nuclear threats and, if necessary, limited nuclear use to compel the end to conflict on terms favorable to Moscow. Putin has made a series of nuclear threats against the United States and the West, with the aim of preventing them from coming to Ukraine's defense. In addition, Russia has employed dual-capable weapons (which can carry both nuclear and conventional warheads) against Ukraine and conducted exercises with its nuclear forces. Putin may believe that he could use nuclear weapons to compel the United States and the West to cease their support for Ukraine. Russia has a wide range of options for conducting nonstrategic nuclear attacks by using one or more of the thousands of low-yield, battlefield nuclear weapons it already possesses. Russia could employ such nuclear weapons in a limited way against Ukrainian forces, bases, logistics hubs, and even cities. Russian nuclear use would harm US interests in the war in Ukraine and globally. Such a strike could cause a humanitarian catastrophe, deal a crippling blow to the Ukrainian military, divide the Western alliance, and compel Kyiv to sue for peace. It would also break a nearly eight-decade taboo on nuclear use. It may make future nuclear use more likely if states (e.g., China) perceive that nuclear weapons can help them achieve their goals without resulting in serious military retaliation from the United States and its allies. Further, it could cause nuclear proliferation if states fear that nuclear weapons might be used against them or if US allies believe that Washington will not respond to a nuclear attack. Recommendations for US policy to prevent Russian nuclear use To prevent Russia from employing nuclear weapons in Ukraine, the United States should issue a clearer deterrent threat. It could choose between vague or explicit threats issued publicly or privately. At present, Putin may believe that he could use nuclear weapons without a significant Western response. A clearer US deterrent threat would help disabuse him of that notion. A vague threat (e.g., "Russia's decision to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine would risk the gravest possible consequences") has the benefit of conveying to Russia that there would be repercussions for nuclear use without committing the United States to a particular course of action. A more specific threat (e.g., "It shall be the policy of this nation to regard any nuclear attack against Ukraine as an attack on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response") would have greater deterrent value but limit US flexibility. While a vague threat could be dismissed as cheap talk, a more specific threat runs the risk of drawing a "red line" that Washington cannot enforce, making a vague threat the better option. These threats could be conveyed privately, but a public threat would likely be more effective in deterring Russia and assuring allies, as US credibility would be on the line for the world to see. Recommendations for a US response to Russian nuclear use A clearer threat should be sufficient to deter a Russian nuclear attack, but Washington must be prepared to execute its threat if deterrence fails. Retaliatory option 1: The United States could intensify its current approach: increasing sanctions on Russia, further isolating Moscow internationally, arming Ukraine with more advanced weapons, and redoubling efforts to militarily reinforce Eastern Europe. Russian nuclear use might provide an opening to convince countries that have so far been reluctant such as India and possibly even China to participate in escalating sanctions. The United States could provide Ukraine with more advanced weapons to strike deeper into Russian territory and help Ukrainian units operate in a nuclear environment. This might include supplying iodine pills, radiation suits, Geiger counters, and other relevant material. The United States and NATO could strengthen their military posture in Eastern Europe, including adding heavier and permanent conventional forces while also relocating US nuclear weapons to Poland. They could announce the development of additional types of low-yield, theater nuclear weapons for deployment in Europe, such as a nuclear Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) or Ground-Launched Cruise Missile (GLCM). The United States could go on nuclear alert to deter attacks on NATO allies. This could include taking visible steps to place warheads on bombers and sending nuclear submarines out to sea. Pros: These steps would impose a cost on Russia, and Washington could plausibly claim that it has followed through on its deterrent threat. Cons: There is a risk that many friends and foes will see these measures as an insufficient response to a nuclear attack. Retaliatory option 2: The United States could respond with military force. Option 2A: The United States could conduct a limited conventional strike on the Russian forces or bases directly involved in the attack. A more robust version of this option would be to join the war on Ukraine's side. Pros: Direct US military intervention would be widely perceived as a meaningful response, potentially restoring nuclear deterrence in Ukraine and reinforcing the global nuclear taboo. Cons: A military response increases the risk of escalation to a direct Russia-NATO war. Russia might conclude that the United States is unwilling to use nuclear weapons, encouraging additional Russian nuclear strikes. Some US allies might still see a conventional response to a nuclear attack as insufficient. Option 2B: The United States could use nuclear weapons to respond to and deter further Russian nuclear use in Ukraine. Pros: A nuclear response is most likely to reinforce the deterrence of adversaries, result in the assurance of allies, and reestablish the global taboo against nuclear use in the future by demonstrating that countries cannot use nuclear weapons without dire consequences. Both allies and adversaries might be surprised or perceive weakness if the United States does not respond in kind to a nuclear attack on Ukraine. Cons: A US decision to use nuclear weapons would raise challenging questions about what Russian target to hit with what US nuclear weapon. A US nuclear strike may restore deterrence, but it might also provoke a Russian nuclear reprisal, raising the risk of a larger nuclear exchange and further humanitarian disaster. Given the costs and benefits above, the best US response if deterrence fails may be a mix of options 1 and 2A: an intensification of ongoing efforts to counter Russian aggression in Ukraine and a limited conventional strike against the Russian forces or bases that launched the nuclear attack. Matthew Kroenig is the acting director of the Council's Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security. He previously served in the Department of Defense and the intelligence community in the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations, including in the Strategy, Middle East, and Nuclear and Missile Defense offices in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Central Intelligence Agency's Strategic Assessments Group. https://thegrayzone.com/2019/10/13/dcs-atlantic-council-raked-in-funding-from-hunter-bidens-corruption-stained-employer-while-courting-his-vp-father/ "The shady arrangement between the Atlantic Council and Burisma the gas company at the center of the 'Ukrainegate' scandal is just one dubious deal out of many at a DC think tank that has become a clearinghouse for legal corruption."  George Bush's "Fool Me Once" Gaffe |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:49:56 AM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By panthermark: If they use a tactical nuke, the gloves come off and NATO goes in balls deep....hard....and dry. Plus, would you want to be a trooper being sent into a country with radiation everywhere? You mean, like troopers digging foxholes in the immediate environs of Chernobyl? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:50:15 AM EST
[#39]
things are changing around the world
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:51:59 AM EST
[#40]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 9:58:08 AM EST
[#41]
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 10:00:28 AM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
Thanks AT!  Let’s consider China’s view of this. China is, at least on paper, still on Russia’s side. How do the Chinese see this war? They probably believe the US is growing weaker every day by sending the best US equipment to the Ukrainians, so it’s good to stay an ally of Russia. But Russia’s economy is on the ropes, and their inferior military technology is quickly running out (with no means to replenish it). And the US? This war is strengthening us. Spending on .mil is way up. R&D is being funded. But most of all: - international buyers will stop buying cheap Russian military hardware, since it does not work on the battlefield. They will want US made weapons (and they’ll pay full price). This war is very very bad news for China. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 10:01:24 AM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By M-1975:
I wonder how you train soldiers to get blown up in their barracks, housing units, field quarters, etc. while sleeping? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 10:03:27 AM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Alphascout: I wonder if they end up amputating that, looks like it's totally atrophied. Tough SOB. |
|
|
|
KS, USA
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 10:04:02 AM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fadedsun: https://i.postimg.cc/0NbnKHrP/C21208-E0-3753-4-EF9-85-EC-EE409-E8-DEA11.jpg What is the writing on the side of this tank? Red font : 'Berserk' white font : 'rooster' ( 'faggot' in ,ussian slang), probably already 're-branded' by UAF |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 10:09:19 AM EST
[Last Edit: BerettaGuy]
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sq40: I consider Segal a traitor and Russian mouthpiece now. I have utter contempt for him. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sq40: Originally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: I'm waiting to see if they mobilize Patrick Lancaster. If Steven Segal gets the call, we/UA are fucked. I've seen him do some shit... I consider Segal a traitor and Russian mouthpiece now. I have utter contempt for him. He was always an asshole. Gave a free concert on Crimea in 2014 for Russian occupiers. I used to "run around" (teach and work on movies) with some of top martial artists in the world throughout the 1990s: Joe Hess. Danny Lane, Superfoot Wallace, Joe Lewis, JoeBonacci (my instructor), Michael DePasquale Jr. And Sr (Karate International magazine), Walley Jay, Keith Vitalli, etc.. and I knew some of Seagal's students. Seagal was ALWAYS considered to be an asshole and a bullshit artist. When he stated he would fight anyone to the death, almost all of the above (most world champions) including Benny "The Jet" Urquidez and a few more put out a full page challenge in Karate International. Asshole Seagal never responded even though he was a friend of DePaquale's and was on the cover many times promoting his movies. Seagal was in POF's booth at SHOT Show about 10 years ago (the owner was a personal friend of his) and Frank DeSomma /POF owner wanted to introduce me since we were old friends. I told him "No thanks." Seagal is also a Russian citizen so if the fat ass ever gets the balls to take a gun to fight Ukrainians (whom he hates), he is fair game. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 10:10:22 AM EST
[#47]
 
 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 10:11:37 AM EST
[Last Edit: sq40]
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By panthermark: If they use a tactical nuke, the gloves come off and NATO goes in balls deep....hard....and dry. Plus, would you want to be a trooper being sent into a country with radiation everywhere? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By panthermark: Originally Posted By sq40: Russia, if it were smart, would train and equip the bulk of the new mobilization troops up and stage another invasion force. Then use tactical nukes on major Ukrainian cities. Then send in the troops to mop up and take the country. Just feeding the grinder is a loser for them. If they use a tactical nuke, the gloves come off and NATO goes in balls deep....hard....and dry. Plus, would you want to be a trooper being sent into a country with radiation everywhere? It’s the Russian way of thinking, and their only path to take Ukraine. I don’t advocate for them to do it… but if they feel they have to win at all cost, that is the only way they can. But the consequences are like you said, probably nuclear reprisals. The real and only smart play if for them to go home. Negotiate handing back all territories it stolen in exchange for sanctions easing. But that’s not the Russian way it seems. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 10:16:07 AM EST
[Last Edit: sq40]
[#49]
I find it interesting that Russians aren’t protesting the war, but protesting being conscripted to fight it.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2022 10:16:27 AM EST
[#50]
 Failed To Load Title 55 pound Alligator Sniper Rifle that Russians are Afraid of |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File
