• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: The Russian Invasion of Ukraine part 8

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jimbo07 said:
Drew down forces on the Finnish border, because they're actually aware that NATO isn't about to imminently invade, and this is all imperialist nonsense?
Click to expand...

Yep. Russia has never feared NATO. Its just a propaganda talking point. The only thing they actually fear is border states joining NATO, because then Russia loses the leverage of: we'll invade you to get what we want.
 
TurkeysGhost said:
Who are they primarily concerned about defending against?
Click to expand...

Gee I don't know, maybe the biggest threat in the area... Russia? NATO is not anti-Russia. It is anti-"member states being attacked" including but not limited to, by Russia. All the equipment going to Ukraine, and sanctions put on Russia... guess what, thats not actually NATO's doing. Sure plenty of NATO states have taken part, but they are not required to do so by their NATO memberships.
 
Last edited:
TurkeysGhost said:
Presumably they were a little preoccupied with their whole disastrous invasion of Ukraine to be in a position to raise a fuss.
Click to expand...

So absolutely nothing then? St Petersburg is now a short drive to NATO border.

Now when it come to the question of Ukraine joining NATO we can assume something has happened first.

Ukraine will have to had pushed the russian army back to the 2014 borders

So once Ukraine has comprehensively shown the russian army to be ineffective against them. What is it Russia is going to do stop Ukraine joining NATO?
 
lobosrul5 said:
Gee I don't know, maybe the biggest threat in the area... Russia? NATO is not anti-Russia. It is anti-"member states being attacked" including but not limited to, by Russia. All the equipment going to Ukraine, and sanctions put on Russia... guess what, thats not actually NATO's doing. Sure plenty of NATO states have taken part, but they are not required to do so by their NATO memberships.
Click to expand...

TO state the obvious...Russia hates NATO because NATO stands in the way of their becoming the "Third Rome"..the dominent power in the world.
The names and rehtoric change,but the drive remains the same. Soviets certainly had it, they just expressed in Marxist rhetoric some of which would have horrified Marx.
 
ginjawarrior said:
So absolutely nothing then? St Petersburg is now a short drive to NATO border.

Now when it come to the question of Ukraine joining NATO we can assume something has happened first.

Ukraine will have to had pushed the russian army back to the 2014 borders

So once Ukraine has comprehensively shown the russian army to be ineffective against them. What is it Russia is going to do stop Ukraine joining NATO?
Click to expand...

My entire point is that the war, or the very least a disputed border situation, may go on indefinitely, thus preempting the necessary preconditions for NATO admission.
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
TO state the obvious...Russia hates NATO because NATO stands in the way of their becoming the "Third Rome"..the dominent power in the world.
Click to expand...

While it's obvious that Moscow has expansionistic, imperialist ambitions, I think you're overlooking some other obvious considerations. Namely, Ukraine represents a jackpot of natural, economic, and strategic resources. This is not something a failed-state kleptocracy can afford to lose its grip on. Like a pyramid scheme, such regimes need regular infusions of new capital in order to keep the scheme going.
 
TurkeysGhost said:
My entire point is that the war, or the very least a disputed border situation, may go on indefinitely, thus preempting the necessary preconditions for NATO admission.
Click to expand...

A precondition which, in reality, does not exist.... find the article that shows me it does before you argue. There is no rule, or article, within NATO that specifies this. However, in practical terms, it means every single member of NATO accepting the fact that WW3 very likely starts if Ukraine is invited.
 
lobosrul5 said:
accepting the fact that WW3 very likely starts if Ukraine is invited.
Click to expand...

the thing is Ukraine is standing in the way of WW3 as they are now.

if they'd capitulated in a couple of days like people thought they would.

if say we had a Corbyn / Trump leadership then its very possible Nato could have crumbled

if the above 2 had happened i think there would be russian troops in the baltics by now

this war either ends with the dissolution of the russian federation or the world blows up.

im hopping that russia will be "a little preoccupied with their whole disastrous", cruel and bloody civil war when the Ukrainian NATO question gets answered
 
Ukraine is receiving NATO instruction and training. Ukraine is receiving NATO weapon systems. Ukraine is receiving NATO reconnaissance and intel products. Ukraine is integrating into NATO's logistics management system. About the only thing of NATO that Ukraine isn't getting is the full fighting force of the alliance - which is the only reason Moscow thought it was safe to invade.

Because look how badly Moscow struggles, against even the merest fraction of NATO power.
 
It's useful for the Russians to have NATO to blame for undermining and thwarting their imperialist ambitions. Otherwise they'd have to blame Russia.
 
theprestige said:
Ukraine is receiving NATO instruction and training. Ukraine is receiving NATO weapon systems. Ukraine is receiving NATO reconnaissance and intel products. Ukraine is integrating into NATO's logistics management system. About the only thing of NATO that Ukraine isn't getting is the full fighting force of the alliance - which is the only reason Moscow thought it was safe to invade.

Because look how badly Moscow struggles, against even the merest fraction of NATO power.
Click to expand...

yes thats the situation now.

what would have been the case if Ukraine wasn't quite as prepared and actually lost Hostomel airport in first couple of days?

And certain countries didnt throw a large amount of ATGMs Ukraines way?

russia wouldnt have had such ample opportunity to show how terrible their army is/was to the world

even now im pretty sure putin still doesnt understand how bad it it and thats all you need
 
dudalb said:
TO state the obvious...Russia hates NATO because NATO stands in the way of their becoming the "Third Rome"..the dominent power in the world.
The names and rehtoric change,but the drive remains the same. Soviets certainly had it, they just expressed in Marxist rhetoric some of which would have horrified Marx.
Click to expand...

In part. It's worth mentioning that, more fundamentally, Russia has been using NATO as a low-risk "common enemy" in its propaganda. The propagandists have been well aware that their bluster is part of vranyo and that they won't suffer consequences for it. Rather, it serves their political purposes to redirect discontent towards an outside force.
 
lobosrul5 said:
A precondition which, in reality, does not exist.... find the article that shows me it does before you argue. There is no rule, or article, within NATO that specifies this. However, in practical terms, it means every single member of NATO accepting the fact that WW3 very likely starts if Ukraine is invited.
Click to expand...

So it's a precondition that, for all intents and purposes, does in fact exist.
 
Russian air defences have shot down one of the country’s most advanced fighter jets in a friendly fire incident, according to reports.

The Russian Su-35 was downed over Tokmak, Zaporizhzhia Oblast, on Thursday where Ukraine is mounting its counter-offensive.

A Russian Telegram channel with close links to the country’s air force appeared to confirm the incident on Friday when it paid tribute to the pilot, who did not survive.
Click to expand...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-n...war-live-zelensky-putin-meets-troshev-latest/
 
Ukraine is all set to deploy it's drone submarines.
They won't be able to do much in the open sea but could do a lot of damage in an Anchorage or port.

To combat them Russia has three Grisha ASW corvettes. These date back to the 70s but we're in production in to the 90s and rely completely on an active 'pinging' sonar. They have one in the bow and the main unit they 'dip' in to the water on a cable.
The dipping sonar can only be deployed while stationary. One ship leap-frogs another as a team across a harbour mouth or around other ships with ASW helicopters filling in gaps between moves.

In 1977, the Royal Navy submarine HMS Swiftsure famously exploited the reliance on poor quality active sonar and tactics and infiltrated a Soviet battle group. She spent hours underneath the then-new aircraft carrier Kiev, with, at times her periscope raised within 10 feet of the aircraft carrier's hull gathering intel.

I think we are going to see more pain for the Black Sea Fleet.

As a contrast the RN and other western navies stopped relying on active pinging sonar to find an underwater target in the 50s.
Passive listening is the method used with an active 'ping' just before a weapon is engaged to get a fine fix on a target position.

Ships sailing round with a 'ping' active is a good way of pinpointing yourself as a target as well as deafening each other.
My time at sea with the RN was aboard anti submarine ships. ASW was the main task of the RN in NATO at the time. Leander class ships were the most capable ASW platforms afloat at the time with several passive systems including a 'dipping' array that could be tailed at high speed to get down among the thermal and salinity layers where a sub would try to hide.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Clutch Cargo
Split Thread Conspiracy theories around the Russian invasion of Ukraine
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
248
Views
5K
arthwollipot
arthwollipot
Andy_Ross
  • Locked
Split From Conspiracy theories around the Russian invasion of Ukraine
Replies
3
Views
150
Shiner
Shiner

Back
Top Bottom