- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted on 3/5/22 at 9:31 pm to UndercoverBryologist
Posted on 3/5/22 at 9:31 pm to UndercoverBryologist
quote:As long as he doesn’t cross into a NATO country he can attack these shipments all he wants and we won’t do anything about it. They’re absolutely fair game. If he’s not already attacking them it’s because he doesn’t have the ability.
Does he get desperate to attack those shipment corridors, even so far as to cross the Romanian, Slovakian, Hungarian, or Polish borders?
0
Posted on 3/5/22 at 9:46 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Agreed. So is it because of the push vs pull system of logistics or the poor weather and roadways?
It is both. The limitations of Russian logistics channels are just less of an issue in the south because they can move from railhead to AO in a shorter time period. Russia is first limited by distance from the railheads, see the paper I linked. Second, they are limited (in this scenario) by their push logistics model. Third, they are more limited in speed and efficiency in the north due to the thawing and the fact it is generally wetter.
This also is not discussing the quality of the men and machines in the southern vs the northern theater. Each part is integral to understanding the whole.
Posted on 3/5/22 at 9:49 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
But you just claimed that people have been SCREAMING for direct combat engagement against russian forces by nato nations. Can you show me these people?
Anyone that has advocated for a no fly zone.
And there have been plenty in this thread.
Posted on 3/5/22 at 9:49 pm to Obtuse1
One could also make the assumption that they’re choosing to supply the southern front more aggressively to exploit its success instead of reinforcing the failure in the North until the tactical situations improves, perhaps when they joins up with the forces pushing from the east.
Posted on 3/5/22 at 9:53 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
KyivIndependent
The U.S. is working with Poland on the possibility of Poland providing fighter jets to Ukraine in return for American F-16 jet fighters, U.S. officials said on March 5.
The deal would require White House approval and congressional action, U.S. officials said
Posted on 3/5/22 at 9:56 pm to TheOcean
quote:
I find it funny most republicans supported the shite show that was Afghanistan/Iraq, yet they are staunchly opposed to providing any support to Ukraine. What happens in Ukraine has a much greater impact on the US than Afghanistan/Iraq.
You find it funny that most Americans supported the Afghanistan campaign after 9/11, even if it dragged on years?
I think you’re a bit of an idiot if you find that hard to believe or understand.
This post was edited on 3/5/22 at 9:57 pm
Posted on 3/5/22 at 9:59 pm to upgrayedd
quote:no, lol
The majority of the people in this thread haven't been advocating for overt NATO involvement including establishment of no fly zones?
Posted on 3/5/22 at 10:00 pm to BuckyCheese
quote:like?
Anyone that has advocated for a no fly zone.
And there have been plenty in this thread.
Posted on 3/5/22 at 10:00 pm to RLDSC FAN
quote:
KyivIndependent The U.S. is working with Poland on the possibility of Poland providing fighter jets to Ukraine in return for American F-16 jet fighters, U.S. officials said on March 5. The deal would require White House approval and congressional action, U.S. officials said
Well, I guess we can hope that there’s some rock-solid intel that Russian ICBMs stopped being functional at some point since 1991.
Posted on 3/5/22 at 10:00 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
One could also make the assumption
One can make any assumption they like. I am sharing Russian doctrinal issues with their logistics. Those issues can be bright-lined or obfuscated based on strategic and tactical choices. I would suggest strategic and possibly tactical choices in the south are masking the issues and strategy and tactics are illuminating them in the north. The function of logistical doctrine is also being tested by the physical conditions of the ground.
Posted on 3/5/22 at 10:05 pm to BuckyCheese
quote:
And there have been plenty in this thread.
I can't remember who advocated for that. I know it's been discussed frequently and that everyone agrees that an imposition of a no fly zone would be an overt direct military act by NATO countries.
I can't remember if any of the regular posters here have argued that a non fly zone should be enforced. Do you know who advocated for that?
Posted on 3/5/22 at 10:12 pm to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
Well, I guess we can hope that there’s some rock-solid intel that Russian ICBMs stopped being functional at some point since 1991.
What was the Russians testing that blew up and caused radiation leak off coast of Siberia 1-2 years ago?
Posted on 3/5/22 at 10:13 pm to UndercoverBryologist
quote:Why does it have to be direct from NATO? Fly them out over the Black Sea and come in from the south. Surely they could take off from Africa, refuel over international waters, and come in high. The other possibility would be Israeli jets being flown in as NATO replaced those aircraft in the Israeli arsenal.
And I’ve said on at least 5 occasions during the course of this thread that I don’t see how these jets could fly into Ukraine from NATO airspace without it being a crystal-clear, night and day, overt action by NATO establishing themselves as participants.
I know there's a bunch of dominoes which could fall but with Iran benefiting (by selling oil/getting on the USA's side of this) I think it's far less likely that they'll take advantage of jet movement logistics than anyway of jets going directly NATO to Ukraine. All options suck but it's about taking the one which sticks the least.
ALSO...Let's get the domestic political bullshite out of here and actually have informed exchanges like those we had in the first few days. Both sides are guilty of it and I think more than a few of us are fed up with scrolling through 3 pages of shite just to get to reading productive exchanges.
Posted on 3/5/22 at 10:13 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
Do you know who advocated for that?
I'm not scanning 427 pages.
Knock yourself out.
Posted on 3/5/22 at 10:14 pm to JohnnyKilroy
I am not sure what the point of giving them fighter jets is right now. The Russian air force is already scared to death of the “ghost of Ukraine” or whatever the hell is dropping their planes to the ground. They need portable long range surface to air missile systems that can take out high flying bombers not fighter planes, and 1000s of rpgs, javelins, anti tank weapons
Posted on 3/5/22 at 10:17 pm to TutHillTiger
quote:
I am not sure what the point of giving them fighter jets is right now. The Russian air force is already scared to death of the “ghost of Ukraine” or whatever the hell is dropping their planes to the ground. They need portable long range surface to air missile systems that can take out high flying bombers not fighter planes, and 1000s of rpgs, javelins, anti tank weapons
Agreed. I think all it does is escalate the prospect of WWIII.
Posted on 3/5/22 at 10:18 pm to BuckyCheese
Thats what I thought
Posted on 3/5/22 at 10:20 pm to BuckyCheese
quote:
I'm not scanning 427 pages.
Knock yourself out.
There's only a handful of regular posters in this thread since the invasion started. Which have advocated for a no-fly zone? Since you claim a lot have, I'm sure you can think of one.
Maybe HHTM? He's retarded though so maybe find a better example.
Bad showing tonight for you and upgrayyed
This post was edited on 3/5/22 at 10:22 pm
Posted on 3/5/22 at 10:24 pm to JohnnyKilroy
I’ve been reading this thread since the war began and I can’t recall any serious posts about a no fly zone or military intervention. Just more of people making shite up so they can stay angry and play victim.
Posted on 3/5/22 at 10:28 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
So at this moment, how concerned are y’all about a full blown WWIII scenario?
Not terribly so. Russia’s army has been proven to be so damn weak in a conventional sense that I just have a hard time seeing Putin even attempt to prod and poke a NATO country any time in the near future.
Page 427 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News