Jump to content

Русский корабль - иди нахуй

Eastwood

By Eastwood
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89779

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Is this when we get to kiss the Kerch bridge goodbye?

And hopefully these were already prepositioned in Europe and ready to be handed over in short order.

If Russia could mobilize a hundred thousand or more like they claim they are currently doing and get them to the front lines, what do they do if Ukraine takes out that bridge?  Most of those soldiers would be in the north and golf carts and Scooby Doo vans aren’t an effective means of transport,  I guess they could move them back to the intact railheads and then try to get them down along the coast above Crime.

Speaking of railheads, imagine how many more railheads and engines are now within range?  Russia will have to keep their in-theater trains on the move and get them unloaded fast.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 86.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • atomheartbevo

    8625

  • MillerEP

    7299

  • Schulz2.0

    3649

  • InkaUtexas

    3007

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

AUS-97HORN
AUS-97HORN

For the love of Christ woman,  stop posting the same fucking thing every 20 mins just to make your neurotic self feel better.     Bring something useful to the thread other than your inane babbli

closetohumping
closetohumping
InkaUtexas
InkaUtexas

I volunteered today. Log/Admin role to replace people for 30-60 days. The operation is in the west, or should the Orcs win will be pulled back behind the NATO wall. Either way the humanitarian effort

Posted Images

Viper

Viper 12111

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

And hopefully these were already prepositioned in Europe and ready to be handed over in short order.

If Russia could mobilize a hundred thousand or more like they claim they are currently doing and get them to the front lines, what do they do if Ukraine takes out that bridge?  Most of those soldiers would be in the north and golf carts and Scooby Doo vans aren’t an effective means of transport,  I guess they could move them back to the intact railheads and then try to get them down along the coast above Crime.

Speaking of railheads, imagine how many more railheads and engines are now within range?  Russia will have to keep their in-theater trains on the move and get them unloaded fast.

Did Russia not finish that rail line they were building though Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SydneyCarton

SydneyCarton 48150

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Storm Shadow/Scalps are better for the Kerch Bridge. 

Theyve had Storm Shadows. And they haven't gone full out after the bridge yet. By this logic, either they didn't have enough storm shadows to do the job, or didn't want to waste them on the bridge etc. That means either the ATACMS they are getting now can/will be used on the bridge, or they don't deem the bridge valuable enough to waste on ATACMS. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27727

Posted
Posted
Just now, SydneyCarton said:

Theyve had Storm Shadows. And they haven't gone full out after the bridge yet. By this logic, either they didn't have enough storm shadows to do the job, or didn't want to waste them on the bridge etc. That means either the ATACMS they are getting now can/will be used on the bridge, or they don't deem the bridge valuable enough to waste on ATACMS. 

I think it's that they need more than one angle of attack to take out such a heavily defended target as the Kerch bridge. ATACMS is a ballistic missile that comes in at mach 3 or 4 out of the stratosphere, Storm shadow/Scalp are stealthy sub/transonic coming in low, and the MALDS decoys can add even more chaos to the scope of an ivan air defense operator. 

I'd bet a dollar that Kerch isn't standing by summer. If Ukraine can cut that lifeline it will completely change the complexion of russias impending offensive 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SydneyCarton

SydneyCarton 48150

Posted
Posted
Just now, Captainant said:

I think it's that they need more than one angle of attack to take out such a heavily defended target as the Kerch bridge. ATACMS is a ballistic missile that comes in at mach 3 or 4 out of the stratosphere, Storm shadow/Scalp are stealthy sub/transonic coming in low, and the MALDS decoys can add even more chaos to the scope of an ivan air defense operator. 

I'd bet a dollar that Kerch isn't standing by summer. If Ukraine can cut that lifeline it will completely change the complexion of russias impending offensive 

While I tend to agree that it doesn't bode well for the Kerch Bridge, I'm simply poiting out the flaw in the concept that the Storm Shadow is better. If it was better, then why the fuck is the Kerch Bridge still standing? And that's not a critque of 956, I'm just saying that clearly some component was missing before, otherwise that Kerch bridge would already be toast. 

Here's to that mothefuker going boom soon. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Dog

The Dog 44126

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

While I tend to agree that it doesn't bode well for the Kerch Bridge, I'm simply poiting out the flaw in the concept that the Storm Shadow is better. If it was better, then why the fuck is the Kerch Bridge still standing? And that's not a critque of 956, I'm just saying that clearly some component was missing before, otherwise that Kerch bridge would already be toast. 

Here's to that mothefuker going boom soon. 

My understanding is they are better used elsewhere and may not have many of them. I think someone also mentioned much of Russia's military traffic no longer uses the bridge. 

It also makes sense to leave it open so civilians can escape once they start pounding Crimea with ATACMS. :D

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kevwun

kevwun 15856

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, NorthLoop said:

What's the range of the Storm Shadow? 

Roughly 550km.  They are much easier to shoot down than atacms because they are much slower and fly horizontally to their targets.

Edited by kevwun
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RPM

RPM 26341

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Parliament said:

I totally understand the possibility the bridge may not have strategic importance and be worth the ordinance.  But…

The symbolism of destroying it makes me hard.  

maxresdefault.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27727

Posted
Posted (edited)

One of the main "lines on maps" strategic overview analysts on YouTube just put out a pretty good video on the recently passed Ukraine aid package, going over what's in it and what's not, how it came to be, and it's complications in delivery.

It touches on the congressional process to explain the mechanical "how" but does not go into the politics, so noCR

Edited by Captainant
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
locodos

locodos 5390

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Ukraine uses long-range missiles secretly provided by US to hit Russian-held areas, officials say

WASHINGTON (AP) — Ukraine for the first time has begun using long-range ballistic missiles provided secretly by the United States, bombing a Russian military airfield in Crimea last week and Russian forces in another occupied area overnight, American officials said Wednesday.

Long sought by Ukrainian leaders, the new missiles give Ukraine nearly double the striking distance — up to 300 kilometers (190 miles) — that it had with the mid-range version of the weapon that it received from the U.S. last October. One of the officials said the U.S. is providing more of these missiles in a new military aid package signed by President Joe Biden on Wednesday.

Biden approved delivery of the long-range Army Tactical Missile System, known as ATACMS, in early March, and the U.S. included a “significant” number of them in a $300 million aid package announced at the time, one official said.

The two U.S. officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the delivery before it became public, would not provide the exact number of missiles given last month or in the latest aid package, which totals about $1 billion.

Ukraine has been forced to ration its weapons and is facing increasing Russian attacks. Ukraine had been begging for the long-range system because the missiles provide a critical ability to strike Russian targets that are farther away, allowing Ukrainian forces to stay safely out of range.

Information about the delivery was kept so quiet that lawmakers and others in recent days have been demanding that the U.S. send the weapons — not knowing they were already in Ukraine.

For months, the U.S. resisted sending Ukraine the long-range missiles out of concern that Kyiv could use them to hit deep into Russian territory, enraging Moscow and escalating the conflict. That was a key reason the administration sent the mid-range version, with a range of about 160 kilometers (roughly 100 miles), in October instead.

A senior U.S. military official said Wednesday that the White House and military planners looked carefully at the risks of providing long-range fires to Ukraine and determined that the time was right to provide them now.

Adm. Christopher Grady, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told The Associated Press in an interview that long-range weapons will help Ukraine take out Russian logistics nodes and troop concentrations that are not on the front lines. He declined to identify what specific weapons were being provided but said they will be “very disruptive if used properly, and I’m confident they will be.”

Like many of the other sophisticated weapons systems provided to Ukraine, the administration weighed whether their use would risk further escalating the conflict.

“I think the time is right, and the boss (Biden) made the decision the time is right to provide these based on where the fight is right now,” Grady said Wednesday. “I think it was a very well considered decision, and we really wrung it out — but again, any time you introduce a new system, any change — into a battlefield, you have to think through the escalatory nature of it.”

Ukrainian officials haven’t publicly acknowledged the receipt or use of long-range ATACMS. But in thanking Congress for passing the new aid bill Tuesday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy noted on the social platform X that “Ukraine’s long-range capabilities, artillery and air defense are extremely important tools for the quick restoration of a just peace.”

One of the U.S. officials said the Biden administration warned Russia last year that if Moscow acquired and used long-range ballistic missiles in Ukraine, Washington would provide the same capability to Kyiv.

Russia got some of those weapons from North Korea and has used them on the battlefield in Ukraine, said the official, prompting the Biden administration to greenlight the new long-range missiles.

The U.S. had refused to confirm that the long-range missiles were given to Ukraine until they were actually used on the battlefield and Kyiv leaders approved the public release. One official said the weapons were used early last week to strike the airfield in Dzhankoi, a city in Crimea, a peninsula that Russia seized from Ukraine in 2014. They were used again overnight east of the occupied city of Berdyansk.

Videos on social media last week showed the explosions at the military airfield, but officials at the time would not confirm it was the ATACMS.

Ukraine’s first use of the weapon came as political gridlock in Congress had delayed approval of a $95 billion foreign aid package for months, including funding for Ukraine, Israel and other allies. Facing acute shortages of artillery and air defense systems, Ukraine has been rationing its munitions as U.S. funding was delayed.

With the war now in its third year, Russia used the delay in U.S. weapons deliveries and its own edge in firepower and personnel to step up attacks across eastern Ukraine. It has increasingly used satellite-guided gliding bombs — dropped from planes from a safe distance — to pummel Ukrainian forces beset by a shortage of troops and ammunition.

The mid-range missiles provided last year, and some of the long-range ones sent more recently, carry cluster munitions that open in the air when fired, releasing hundreds of bomblets rather than a single warhead. Others sent recently have a single warhead.

One critical factor in the March decision to send the weapons was the U.S. Army’s ability to begin replacing the older ATACMS. The Army is now buying the Precision Strike Missile, so is more comfortable taking ATACMS off the shelves to provide to Ukraine, the official said.

  • Hook 'Em 9
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
B00M

B00M 6458

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, bolverk said:

"Corpses everywhere. They're all ours."

"There's war, but this... it was a meatgrinder here."

 

Looks just like the land around Avdiivka 

Edited by B00M
He does in fact say “this is Avdiivka direction” at the 4 minute mark
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bevo

Bevo 13596

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Schulz2.0 said:

That's 10-13,000 rounds per day. Ukraine is around 2,000 rounds per day before US funding going to about 6,000 per day for a single year after funding. No matter what, Ukraine is going to have to figure out how to increase its own manufacturing of munitions.  I wonder what it takes for Ukraine to manufacture its own rounds. I'm sure Russia isn't paying US manufacturing rates to get to 13,000 rounds daily. I'm no expert on financing weapons and have no clue whether Russia or Ukraine have all the raw materials on hand or if it has to source and pay for certain things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
956 Worldwide

956 Worldwide 34747

Posted
Posted

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/04/24/statement-from-national-security-advisor-jake-sullivan-on-russias-veto-of-the-un-security-council-resolution-on-the-outer-space-treaty/
 

Quote

Today, Russia vetoed a UN Security Council resolution, proposed jointly by the United States and Japan, that would have reaffirmed the fundamental obligation of States Parties to the Outer Space Treaty not to place nuclear weapons in orbit around the Earth. The resolution also would have called on all Member States not to develop nuclear weapons specifically designed to be placed in orbit. Placement by a State Party of a nuclear weapon in orbit would not only violate the Outer Space Treaty, but would threaten the vital communications, scientific, meteorological, agricultural, commercial, and national security services that any and all satellites provide to societies around the globe. As we have noted previously, the United States assesses that Russia is developing a new satellite carrying a nuclear device. We have heard President Putin say publicly that Russia has no intention of deploying nuclear weapons in space. If that were the case, Russia would not have vetoed this resolution.

 

  • Rage+1 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NotActuallyALonghorn

NotActuallyALonghorn 4977

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/04/24/statement-from-national-security-advisor-jake-sullivan-on-russias-veto-of-the-un-security-council-resolution-on-the-outer-space-treaty/
 

 

A month or two ago, there was a news story I happened across on one of the UFO subreddits that there was something in space that was gravely concerning to the US government. A week or so later, there was a news story about a satellite deorbitting and burning up in the atmosphere. Of course they said it was some ordinary satellite, but I wonder if that was a cover for us shooting down a satellite with a nuke or maybe an EMP. Prime tinfoil hat stuff, yes, but certainly not out of the realm of possibility. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
956 Worldwide

956 Worldwide 34747

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

A month or two ago, there was a news story I happened across on one of the UFO subreddits that there was something in space that was gravely concerning to the US government. A week or so later, there was a news story about a satellite deorbitting and burning up in the atmosphere. Of course they said it was some ordinary satellite, but I wonder if that was a cover for us shooting down a satellite with a nuke or maybe an EMP. Prime tinfoil hat stuff, yes, but certainly not out of the realm of possibility. 

I would take seriously the grave warnings but wouldn’t get too excited about any alleged U.S. kinetic action in space— which would undermine the warnings we are sending out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...