6 ms·

> ICBMs can strike anywhere on the globe. Physical proximity to Moscow isn't really necessary. I am talking about getting inside an early warning window and pr

> ICBMs can strike anywhere on the globe. Physical proximity to Moscow isn't really necessary. I am talking about getting inside an early warning window and preventing a Russian response. > Second, Finland joined and is within HIMARS range of St Petersburg HIMARS are not strategic nuclear weapons > That is silly. You have to consider that Russia's willingness to sacrifice its own people can't be infinite either. Russian has between a 7 to 1, and a 10 to 1 advantage in artillery, and this advantage is growing. > I see no reason why such an agreement would be advantageous to anyone. If Ukraine had agreed to be neutral (non-NATO) the war and all this bloodshed would have been avoided. I'm sad so many people had to die. This would have been greatly advantageous for some of those dead people not to have died in vain because we want Russia to have a quagmire. > Easy answer. Give them enough stuff to push Russia back to the border. Won't happen. The Russians are likely going for all the ethnically Russian Oblasts in Ukraine.

_kbh_ 3y ago
> If Ukraine had agreed to be neutral (non-NATO) the war and all this bloodshed would have been avoided. This was already offered by Germany, turns out it's not really what Russia wants. > I'm sad so many people had to die. This would have been greatly advantageous for some of those dead people not to have died in vain because we want Russia to have a quagmire. Be great if Russia just decided not to invade instead. > Won't happen. The Russians are likely going for all the ethnically Russian Oblasts in Ukraine. Yes because Russia has an infinite number of soldiers, vehicles and weapons and isn't running out of all three of those things.
nradov 3y ago
Russia may have more artillery tubes, but they have a shortage of precision guided ammunition and are having trouble manufacturing more. They're basically using it as fast as they can make it just to hold the current lines and have been unable to build up the stockpiles that would be needed for another offensive. Meanwhile PGM deliveries to Ukraine have been accelerating.
- OrvalWintermute 3y ago
  > Russia may have more artillery tubes, but they have a shortage of precision guided ammunition and are having trouble manufacturing more. This is incorrect, and the Russians have easier logistics than the Western Ukrainians, because the Russians are only fielding Russian arty systems, and the Western Ukrainians have a mishmash of polish, soviet, US, French, and others. To quote someone from the US Defense establishment, Thomas A. Callaghan Jr., “Quantity has a Quality All Its Own". This is doubly true with area of effect weaponry like massed artillery fires. > They're basically using it as fast as they can make it just to hold the current lines They are currently winning a war of attrition. The Russian army is specifically designed for this type of warfare. > and have been unable to build up the stockpiles that would be needed for another offensive. If you are attriting an enemy at good odds, there is no need for an offensive. Key defensive points like Mariupol and Bakhmut have been taken. Given the artillery supremacy, there is little chance the Western Ukrainians will be able to break out, and the Russian defensive lines are prepped just in case. > Meanwhile PGM deliveries to Ukraine have been accelerating. Precision guided munitions (HIMAR launched Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (all variants), Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) (80% GPS guided) , Storm Shadows, as well as Precision guided bombs like JDAMs) are inaccurate when they encounter the wide GPS jamming which is now happening across much of Ukraine. Given how much of the HIMAR launched missiles are GPS guided in a GPS jammed environment, they are not very accurate. Furthermore, the Russians have S400 and S500 air defense, the very best AD system in the world, and they regularly are shooting down PGMs. If we think strategically about this war Surveillance: equal (assumes access to US Spy satellites assisting Western Ukrainians) Intelligence: equal (assumes full access to Western capabilities) Battle Management: favors Western Ukrainians due to full access to US systems & fusion capabilities Logistics: favors Russians heavily due to simplified support/maintenance Artillery: Between 6:1 and 10:1 favoring of Russians Air Defense: favors Russians Infantry: favors Russians due to massive reserves Armor: favors Russians, latest MBTs employed on Russian side Drones: favors Russians, DJI directly supporting Russians, latest & greatest in Russian stockpile, Iranian support Aeronautics: favors Russians, regularly dropping FAB500 and greater PGMs Missiles: favors Russians due to hypersonic missiles and greater missile supply Electronic Warfare: favors Russians due to full access to Russian EW systems, GPS jammed environment
dale_glass 3y ago
> I am talking about getting inside an early warning window and preventing a Russian response. Okay, so they can be in Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania which are around the same distance. > HIMARS are not strategic nuclear weapons The point is that Finland is close enough to strike St Petersburg with something old, cheap and commonly available. Can always go fancier than that. No reason why Finland couldn't host nuclear weapons. > Russian has between a 7 to 1, and a 10 to 1 advantage in artillery, and this advantage is growing. Guess will see what happens, but the likelihood of Russia winning this seems very low. > If Ukraine had agreed to be neutral (non-NATO) the war and all this bloodshed would have been avoided. If Russia had agreed to be neutral (stop panicking about NATO) the war and all this bloodshed would have been avoided. Mind you NATO was nearly dead until Russia started this nonsense. It's thanks to them that it's been greatly revitalized. > Won't happen. The Russians are likely going for all the ethnically Russian Oblasts in Ukraine. There won't be ethnically Russian Oblasts in Ukraine soon. War already created a huge loss of population, and if Ukraine manages to regain them they'll use the war as a reason to systematically remove any Russian remains from them. And I think thanks to the war this will be largely non-controversial.

_kbh_ 3y ago

> If Ukraine had agreed to be neutral (non-NATO) the war and all this bloodshed would have been avoided. This was already offered by Germany, turns out it's not really what Russia wants. > I'm sad so many people had to die. This would have been greatly advantageous for some of those dead people not to have died in vain because we want Russia to have a quagmire. Be great if Russia just decided not to invade instead. > Won't happen. The Russians are likely going for all the ethnically Russian Oblasts in Ukraine. Yes because Russia has an infinite number of soldiers, vehicles and weapons and isn't running out of all three of those things.

nradov 3y ago

Russia may have more artillery tubes, but they have a shortage of precision guided ammunition and are having trouble manufacturing more. They're basically using it as fast as they can make it just to hold the current lines and have been unable to build up the stockpiles that would be needed for another offensive. Meanwhile PGM deliveries to Ukraine have been accelerating.

OrvalWintermute 3y ago
> Russia may have more artillery tubes, but they have a shortage of precision guided ammunition and are having trouble manufacturing more. This is incorrect, and the Russians have easier logistics than the Western Ukrainians, because the Russians are only fielding Russian arty systems, and the Western Ukrainians have a mishmash of polish, soviet, US, French, and others. To quote someone from the US Defense establishment, Thomas A. Callaghan Jr., “Quantity has a Quality All Its Own". This is doubly true with area of effect weaponry like massed artillery fires. > They're basically using it as fast as they can make it just to hold the current lines They are currently winning a war of attrition. The Russian army is specifically designed for this type of warfare. > and have been unable to build up the stockpiles that would be needed for another offensive. If you are attriting an enemy at good odds, there is no need for an offensive. Key defensive points like Mariupol and Bakhmut have been taken. Given the artillery supremacy, there is little chance the Western Ukrainians will be able to break out, and the Russian defensive lines are prepped just in case. > Meanwhile PGM deliveries to Ukraine have been accelerating. Precision guided munitions (HIMAR launched Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (all variants), Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) (80% GPS guided) , Storm Shadows, as well as Precision guided bombs like JDAMs) are inaccurate when they encounter the wide GPS jamming which is now happening across much of Ukraine. Given how much of the HIMAR launched missiles are GPS guided in a GPS jammed environment, they are not very accurate. Furthermore, the Russians have S400 and S500 air defense, the very best AD system in the world, and they regularly are shooting down PGMs. If we think strategically about this war Surveillance: equal (assumes access to US Spy satellites assisting Western Ukrainians) Intelligence: equal (assumes full access to Western capabilities) Battle Management: favors Western Ukrainians due to full access to US systems & fusion capabilities Logistics: favors Russians heavily due to simplified support/maintenance Artillery: Between 6:1 and 10:1 favoring of Russians Air Defense: favors Russians Infantry: favors Russians due to massive reserves Armor: favors Russians, latest MBTs employed on Russian side Drones: favors Russians, DJI directly supporting Russians, latest & greatest in Russian stockpile, Iranian support Aeronautics: favors Russians, regularly dropping FAB500 and greater PGMs Missiles: favors Russians due to hypersonic missiles and greater missile supply Electronic Warfare: favors Russians due to full access to Russian EW systems, GPS jammed environment

dale_glass 3y ago

> I am talking about getting inside an early warning window and preventing a Russian response. Okay, so they can be in Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania which are around the same distance. > HIMARS are not strategic nuclear weapons The point is that Finland is close enough to strike St Petersburg with something old, cheap and commonly available. Can always go fancier than that. No reason why Finland couldn't host nuclear weapons. > Russian has between a 7 to 1, and a 10 to 1 advantage in artillery, and this advantage is growing. Guess will see what happens, but the likelihood of Russia winning this seems very low. > If Ukraine had agreed to be neutral (non-NATO) the war and all this bloodshed would have been avoided. If Russia had agreed to be neutral (stop panicking about NATO) the war and all this bloodshed would have been avoided. Mind you NATO was nearly dead until Russia started this nonsense. It's thanks to them that it's been greatly revitalized. > Won't happen. The Russians are likely going for all the ethnically Russian Oblasts in Ukraine. There won't be ethnically Russian Oblasts in Ukraine soon. War already created a huge loss of population, and if Ukraine manages to regain them they'll use the war as a reason to systematically remove any Russian remains from them. And I think thanks to the war this will be largely non-controversial.