In reply to tuna55 :
I suspect it would be a stretch of plausible deniability. At this point, NATO countries are likely doing all they think they can get away with that won't "force" Putin to escalate the conflict to elsewhere, physically or digitally.
As for the increased radiation levels, the most believable logic I have heard so far is because of all the dust getting kicked up by all the activity in the area, not any new leaks.
FatMongo said:bobzilla said:In reply to FatMongo :
Don't be a dick. Are you trying to shut this down?
Sorry for being a dick.
Please explain the life expectancy of an A-10 over a battlefield occupied by a modern A-A/S-A capable adversary.
You seem to be the expert, enlighten us
In reply to tuna55 :
My limited understanding is that it was a strategic location between the border and Kyiv.
tuna55 said:93EXCivic said:Worrying there are reports of higher then normal radiation around Chernobyl...
I hear that. I think it's likely that simply driving heavy machinery over the grounds would cause that.
I also still do not understand the rationale for taking the power plant. What could they do? If they destroy the sarcophagus then they just slowly pollute Europe. Why? What's the reason? It's the least rational target for a Russian invasion of basically every place in Ukraine.
It's a staging area they know no one will be dumb enough to fire rockets/missiles at. Safest place to keep troops/equipment.
stuart in mn said:A Ukrainian soldier on a tiny island in the Black Sea didn't hold back when threatened with bombing by a Russian warship as Moscow continued its assault on Ukrainian territory.
According to a purported audio exchange, as the Russians approached Snake Island, also known as Zmiinyi Island, the Russian officer says: "This is a military warship. This is a Russian military warship. I suggest you lay down your weapons and surrender to avoid bloodshed and needless casualties. Otherwise, you will be bombed.”
A Ukrainian soldier responds: "Russian warship, go f*** yourself.”
Those were the final known words heard from the island.
All 13 Ukrainian defenders were killed in a Russian bombardment Thursday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said. "All border guards died heroically but did not give up. They will be awarded the title of Hero of Ukraine posthumously," Zelensky said.
That's the kind of story the Ukrainians can rally around. It reminds me of the famous "Nuts" quote from General McAuliffe at Bastogne during the Battle of the Bulge.
In reply to tuna55 :
My guess is that they believe the Ukrainians won't launch a counterattack on the area maybe.
Or Putin is about to do some of even more epically evil proportions.
Tom_Spangler (Forum Supporter) said:stuart in mn said:A Ukrainian soldier on a tiny island in the Black Sea didn't hold back when threatened with bombing by a Russian warship as Moscow continued its assault on Ukrainian territory.
According to a purported audio exchange, as the Russians approached Snake Island, also known as Zmiinyi Island, the Russian officer says: "This is a military warship. This is a Russian military warship. I suggest you lay down your weapons and surrender to avoid bloodshed and needless casualties. Otherwise, you will be bombed.”
A Ukrainian soldier responds: "Russian warship, go f*** yourself.”
Those were the final known words heard from the island.
All 13 Ukrainian defenders were killed in a Russian bombardment Thursday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said. "All border guards died heroically but did not give up. They will be awarded the title of Hero of Ukraine posthumously," Zelensky said.That's the kind of story the Ukrainians can rally around. It reminds me of the famous "Nuts" quote from General McAuliffe at Bastogne during the Battle of the Bulge.
Love that story. The sad difference is that Gen McAuliffe won that battle.
93EXCivic said:In reply to tuna55 :
My guess is that they believe the Ukrainians won't launch a counterattack on the area maybe.
Or Putin is about to do some of even more epically evil proportions.
I'm hoping the former. The latter doesn't make sense even from an evil perspective. As bad as Chernobyl is and was, simply destroying the buildings and letting the reactor hit the atmosphere just brings us back to 1986, it annoys everyone and over years people downstream of the plume suffer higher cancer rates and lower lifespan, but it doesn't fit into any maniacal plan really.
eastsideTim said:tuna55 said:93EXCivic said:Worrying there are reports of higher then normal radiation around Chernobyl...
I hear that. I think it's likely that simply driving heavy machinery over the grounds would cause that.
I also still do not understand the rationale for taking the power plant. What could they do? If they destroy the sarcophagus then they just slowly pollute Europe. Why? What's the reason? It's the least rational target for a Russian invasion of basically every place in Ukraine.
It's a staging area they know no one will be dumb enough to fire rockets/missiles at. Safest place to keep troops/equipment.
Maybe true. Like a suicide vest I guess? Weird though.
hybridmomentspass said:FatMongo said:bobzilla said:In reply to FatMongo :
Don't be a dick. Are you trying to shut this down?
Sorry for being a dick.
Please explain the life expectancy of an A-10 over a battlefield occupied by a modern A-A/S-A capable adversary.
You seem to be the expert, enlighten us
I mean he is kind of right. The A10s are slow and would certainly take a beating versus modern anti aircraft missles. They are great when you arent facing that. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/can-the-10-warthog-defeat-its-toughest-enemy-17413
In reply to 93EXCivic :
I saw a report yesterday, before the Russians took control, that shelling had hit a waste repository. It was quickly pulled down from AP and replaced with more vagueries. Could have been inaccurate or disproved, or....
As for why Chernobyl, it's on the way to Kyiv from fascist-fanatic Belarus. If there was a fight there then there were Ukrainians there that were not desired behind the lines of the Russian blitz so they needed to be cleared.
Of course the USAF wants more F-35s, gotta justify that blown budget somehow. More on topic, unless we were supplying full crews, maintenance and operation, with parts and armaments for the "A-10s, Apaches, and Abrams" it wouldn't do them any good. The Ukrainians are operating bloc equipment with bloc logistics and training, NATO equipment will do them little to no good at this juncture. An M16? Sure. A jet? Not so much. Even light mortars would likely only be useful for trained mortar crews. Direct fire weapons are the most reasonable support for us to potentially provide, in addition to more Javelin rockets
93EXCivic said:hybridmomentspass said:FatMongo said:bobzilla said:In reply to FatMongo :
Don't be a dick. Are you trying to shut this down?
Sorry for being a dick.
Please explain the life expectancy of an A-10 over a battlefield occupied by a modern A-A/S-A capable adversary.
You seem to be the expert, enlighten us
I mean he is kind of right. The A10s are slow and would certainly take a beating versus modern anti aircraft missles. They are great when you arent facing that. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/can-the-10-warthog-defeat-its-toughest-enemy-17413
A10 survivability has been a long running point of contention, as the Air Force would like to buy more F35's and F15 Strike Eagles https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russia-would-destroy-the-10-warthog-war-the-f-35b-could-take-26064
06HHR (Forum Supporter) said:93EXCivic said:hybridmomentspass said:FatMongo said:bobzilla said:In reply to FatMongo :
Don't be a dick. Are you trying to shut this down?
Sorry for being a dick.
Please explain the life expectancy of an A-10 over a battlefield occupied by a modern A-A/S-A capable adversary.
You seem to be the expert, enlighten us
I mean he is kind of right. The A10s are slow and would certainly take a beating versus modern anti aircraft missles. They are great when you arent facing that. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/can-the-10-warthog-defeat-its-toughest-enemy-17413
A10 survivability has been a long running point of contention, as the Air Force would like to buy more F35's and F15 Strike Eagles https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russia-would-destroy-the-10-warthog-war-the-f-35b-could-take-26064
Slap the Ukraine flag on a few dozen and let's find out how they fare against Russians. Then we'll know.
Error404 said:In reply to 93EXCivic :
I saw a report yesterday, before the Russians took control, that shelling had hit a waste repository. It was quickly pulled down from AP and replaced with more vagueries. Could have been inaccurate or disproves, or....
Amnesty International and the Ukraine Foreign Ministry are calling BS on Russian "precision missles" https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/02/russian-military-commits-indiscriminate-attacks-during-the-invasion-of-ukraine/
In reply to FatMongo :
the last 20 years they seemed to do quite well. Granted, even in the cold war they knew they would take heavy casualties but the airframe is designed to take a beating unlike anything else in modern history. Go back to the old tactics of treetop navigation and it mitigates some of the modern defenses. I didn't say they wouldn't take losses but I guarantee they'd create havoc while they were up.
06HHR (Forum Supporter) said:Error404 said:In reply to 93EXCivic :
I saw a report yesterday, before the Russians took control, that shelling had hit a waste repository. It was quickly pulled down from AP and replaced with more vagueries. Could have been inaccurate or disproves, or....
Amnesty International and the Ukraine Foreign Ministry are calling BS on Russian "precision missles" https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/02/russian-military-commits-indiscriminate-attacks-during-the-invasion-of-ukraine/
This link has two gems:
“If the Security Council is paralyzed through veto, it is up to the entire membership to step up,” said Agnès Callamard.
“We call on the UN General Assembly to meet in an emergency session and adopt a resolution denouncing Russia unlawful attack and calling for an end to all violations of humanitarian law and human rights. The lives, safety and well-being of millions of civilians is at stake.”
This seems awfully different than 2014 in terms of how many people are willing to call BS on Russias imbecility. I heard that term today from none other than Al Mohler, which is one of the strongest words I've heard him use.
He lied even when the visible evidence of Russian forces amassing on the border was clear. He lies about Ukraine. He said that Ukraine basically is being ruled by a fascist government, put up by Western powers, simply not true. He has said that Ukraine has been carrying out genocide against Russian speaking peoples. And by the way, the imbecility of that is made clear by the fact that most people in Ukraine speak Russian. What he meant was people in Ukraine, speaking Russian who think fondly of Russia. And for that matter might actually want to be a part of Russia, might lament the breakup of the former Soviet Union. But all of this is a word game, or at least it was until it became a shooting war, which it now is.
But Christians though, there are many lessons of history to be learned by observing war. And one of the big lessons is that war is often caused not only by aggression, but by hubris, by pride, by overreaching. Vladimir Putin may desire to appear strong. Maybe he thinks this is a demonstration of Russian strength, but military observers by the way, were not uniformly impressed by the professionalism of the Russian forces as they began action yesterday. This doesn't actually make Vladimir Putin look strong. It doesn't make Russia look strong. It makes them look like what they are, a paranoid, insecure nation, a nation that has no security in its own self-identity, but only finds the demonstration of solidarity and aggression.
We're talking about a nation led by a plutocrat who has plundered his own economy and has made himself rich. One of the richest men in the world, as president of Russia. Do the math, that's not supposed to happen. You're looking at a long term streak of Russian paranoia. That's not to say all Russian people are paranoid. That's certainly not true. It is to say that as a nation, Russia has demonstrated a paranoia for a matter of centuries.
And when it comes to the truth, we have seen the truth simply trampled upon not only by the tongue, but also by the tanks. But I was saying that Christians understand that there are many moral lessons almost immediately revealed by war, especially by this kind of aggressive war undertaken by Russia against Ukraine. We're not talking about two nations that went to war. That's not what happened here. We're talking about a Russian invasion of another sovereign nation. And of course it comes with the truth that Russia's now claiming that it never should have been a sovereign nation. But it is a sovereign nation until it falls to Russia, which now might be at least in military terms predetermined. As of last night, Russian military forces coming not only from Russia, but also from the north and from the south in Ukraine were making progress towards taking the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv.
And that is fully explained. When you come to understand what Vladimir Putin was saying in that hour long address when he basically said that he was not going to be satisfied until the regime, the democratically elected regime in Ukraine is gone. Toppled by a government that considers itself not only allied with but subservient to Russia. And that means to Vladimir Putin. But one of the lessons of war that Christians should look for and anticipate in this picture is the fact that when you have this kind of aggressive, invasive action, you often have a very great difficulty on the other side holding the territory without great loss of life, without an enormous political cost. Now right now it's clear, Vladimir Putin at home thinks this will only gain him glory. But one of the lessons the Soviet Union learned during the course of the late seventies and the 1980s is that kind of military glory turns to dust very, very quickly.
https://albertmohler.com/2022/02/25/briefing-2-25-22
tuna55 said:93EXCivic said:In reply to tuna55 :
My guess is that they believe the Ukrainians won't launch a counterattack on the area maybe.
Or Putin is about to do some of even more epically evil proportions.
I'm hoping the former. The latter doesn't make sense even from an evil perspective. As bad as Chernobyl is and was, simply destroying the buildings and letting the reactor hit the atmosphere just brings us back to 1986, it annoys everyone and over years people downstream of the plume suffer higher cancer rates and lower lifespan, but it doesn't fit into any maniacal plan really.
isn't there some sort of heat exchanger running on liquid nitrogen under the floor to keep the pile from going all "China Syndrome" into the ground water...? I'm basing that off the HBO series so it might be complete BS...
Since my view was asked for, here it is.
I think that the Russians have thrown in first-echelon armored spearheads to secure routes to key objectives, but are not concerning themselves with securing territory in any broader sense. Kyiv is clearly the primary target, more to displace or capture the government. I expect the Ukrainians to fight hard to hold it, particularly as long as Zelensky stays in place. Almost all of the reports are suspect individually, but with the ability to geolocate videos and photos, it is possible to get a sense of what's happening. The Russian advance is not as fast as they would have liked, and if it bogs down, they will have to throw in second-echelon forces that were probably intended for other purposes in order to maintain momentum. Another issue the Russians face is a shortage of infantry in their formations, which may not be too problematic in clearing routes, but gets very tricky once you get into FISH situations against a bunch of pissed-off locals.
On the sanctions front, it's a bit disappointing that the Germans and others won't back a SWIFT ban (because Russia owes them a lot of money, and without SWIFT they can't get it). Regardless of that, any sanctions regime is going to take time to work, likely far longer than combat operations will persist. News commentators who are baffled that Putin hasn't given up yet because of the sanctions are living in an alternate fantasy world. The loss of sporting events and access to foreign airspace, while fairly small things, may be more effective than straight media reporting in signaling to ordinary Russians how Putin's actions are being viewed on the outside.
Where this goes in the immediate future is difficult to say. The Russians clearly want Kyiv, they want Zelensky, and they want to be able to claim victory and dictate terms as quickly as possible. Assuming continued resistance - and I see no indication that the Ukrainians will lay down arms - this may well mean heavy bombardment of the city. Or it could beseige it and wait; this could take a long time, but it does reduce the likelihood of heavy Russian casualties. Other fronts will probably see continued fighting, but more because the Russians want to hold Ukrainian forces away from Kyiv than because they really want to clear territory. Whatever gains they do make may prove useful in a settlement, but that's a secondary consideration.
Finally, NATO has a lot of air activity going on: two AWACS, piles of tanker support, fighter patrols along the frontier, and I'm sure more than we can't see. I haven't seen reports of additional weapons shipments into Ukraine, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was being done on the ground via Poland and/or Hungary, either openly or surreptitiously (back in the 90s, during the opening phase of the Yugoslav war, the Austrians funneled weapons into Slovenia in garbage trucks).
FatMongo said:bobzilla said:In reply to FatMongo :
Don't be a dick. Are you trying to shut this down?
Sorry for being a dick.
Please explain the life expectancy of an A-10 over a battlefield occupied by a modern A-A/S-A capable adversary.
I am completely unfamiliar with the capabilities of the weapons you discribe, so do not have an opinion. I also don't have a clue (or care) about your other agendas. But not being an azz hat to everyone that disagrees with you would go a long way in getting an outsider to consider your opinion. You don't HAVE to immediately get confrontational.
(and for the record, I don't like it when some mods get confrontational, either. )
They took Chernobyl because it's a good staging area with infrastructure- they'll likely turn it into a firebase or airstrip, if it doesn't have one already from building the sarcophagus. The rad levels going up is because the soil around it is irradiated and any action like shelling or tank movements is going to kick it up. Winds have also changed to the north, so uh... great job putin! You irradiated your own men! Not that he cares, of course.
On a very different note, the situation in Kyiv called to mind the photographs Josef Koudelka took in Prague in 1968. If the Russians come into the city (and this is likely to be true in other cities as well), I'm expecting scenes like these:
stroker said:tuna55 said:93EXCivic said:In reply to tuna55 :
My guess is that they believe the Ukrainians won't launch a counterattack on the area maybe.
Or Putin is about to do some of even more epically evil proportions.
I'm hoping the former. The latter doesn't make sense even from an evil perspective. As bad as Chernobyl is and was, simply destroying the buildings and letting the reactor hit the atmosphere just brings us back to 1986, it annoys everyone and over years people downstream of the plume suffer higher cancer rates and lower lifespan, but it doesn't fit into any maniacal plan really.
isn't there some sort of heat exchanger running on liquid nitrogen under the floor to keep the pile from going all "China Syndrome" into the ground water...? I'm basing that off the HBO series so it might be complete BS...
I do not think that is accurate.
So, new day, doesn't look to bad on the map, buuut it looks like Russia has recaptured Hostomel airport, just outside of Kiev. They obviously meant to do this yesterday, but once it is secure they can fly in 1000's of troops and light armor to assault Kiev. They have already shut down the western approaches to Kiev and it looks like heavy armor is approaching from the north.
The really bad stuff, and bad images / videos are likely to start as the Russians enter Kiev. There is lots of media there, and if the Ukrainians fight as viciously as the seem to have done so far, this could get ugly. This could potentially be Ukraine's Stalingrad, only this time, it's the Russians be ground up by the fierce defense of the Ukrainians.
Regarding heavy fighting: There certainly has been heavy fighting (particularly in the north east of the map below). The reason you don't see it is because there are no news crews there, and the people doing the fighting or civilians have better things to do then pull out a phone (also possible / likely cell traffic is being jammed there, I am a little surprised stuff is even coming out of Kiev)
Regarding A10's and air superiority: The Russians almost certainly had total air superiority within a few hours of this starting. The Ukrainian Mig29 over Kiev is so shocking because of this. He must have been almost literally flying around buildings! Not sure how he got away with it. The A10 is impressive, and the Russians know this, they have their own (Su-25 Frogfoot). But, the Russians also have very effective anti aircraft, including the ability to hit low flying aircraft. The Russians are well aware of US air power, and have designed there military with that in mind. The Ukrainians are doing a decent job of taking down Russian planes / helicopters and they are only using hand held AA.
llysgennad said:Russia itself needs to be decapitated... Kick them out of the UN.
I'm quoting myself because I'm so prescient...
Ukraine UN rep asking if Russia should even be in the UN. The seat was for the USSR, was declared vacant , and Russia eventually just said "we want that seat". It was never officially approved.
Error404 said:Of course the USAF wants more F-35s, gotta justify that blown budget somehow. ...
Slightly off topic semi-personal story about technological advancements, romanticizing older technlogy, and the costs of maintaining and retrofitting outdated equipment. My grandfather was kind of the key person in getting the Navy to switch from the F-14 to the F/A-18.
Long story short - the admirals wanted to spend a bunch of money to upgrade the F-14 with new engines and electronics. My grandfather was on the House Armed Services Comittee and was widely recognized at the time as probably the most knowledgeable member of congress on things like military aircraft. He discovered that it would actually be *cheaper* to switch over to the F/A-18, and as an experience pilot, confirmed that they were far more capable as well.
As expensive as new military equipment is, it is often cheaper to upgrade completely than to try to upgrade an older platform.
You'll need to log in to post.
