Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
5 hours ago, Parliament said:

What has been the turning point?  Is it as simple as Ukraine being able to doggedly wear down Russian infrastructure?  They've been barely able to take out assets barely faster than Russia can replace?  Do that for 2.5 years (!) and you achieve superiority?

Two things, first, their long-range weapons that are just coming online - we've been waiting to see them in action, and they aren't even at full production yet.  Second, it's the concentrated effort (and success) to bring down the Russian oil & gas infrastructure, and by proxy, their economy. The Russians appear to be powerless to stop them from doing it, which means Russian air defenses are absolutely strained. Seeing a reduction in exports and gas stations in Moscow being out of some fuels seems huge, and that is while they still have reserves sitting in tanks.

If Ukraine can keep up a steady pressure on oil & gas, even increase it, I don't see how Russia recovers, at least on the civilian side. If they do something like drop the Kerch Bridge, Russia will have to have fuel depots to supply vehicles going over the land bridge, which means static targets (and Ukraine doesn't even have to hit a depot, just the infrastructure supplying it).

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 hours ago, Parliament said:

Atom/Inka: Pound for pound, what western European NATO member punches the hardest?  (Per capita) who has the most capable military?

I don't know about per-capita, but I'd say England, France, and Poland would be contenders - England and France have experienced leaders (NCOs and commissioned officers) thanks to recent combat experience (Poland does as well, they were with us in Afghanistan). France has a lot of recent experience in Africa. They all have very integrated militaries from a combined arms point of view - they engage in training exercises on a large scale with everything integrated so infantry know how to work with armor and artillery, etc..  England and France have solid navies. Their leadership is serious about Russia.  Poland might get the edge in the future, but they aren't done expanding so I'm not sure how big they are.

Germany would be in the mix because they are large, but their leadership position is kind of wonky.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

I don't know about per-capita, but I'd say England, France, and Poland would be contenders - England and France have experienced leaders (NCOs and commissioned officers) thanks to recent combat experience (Poland does as well, they were with us in Afghanistan). France has a lot of recent experience in Africa. They all have very integrated militaries from a combined arms point of view - they engage in training exercises on a large scale with everything integrated so infantry know how to work with armor and artillery, etc..  England and France have solid navies. Their leadership is serious about Russia.  Poland might get the edge in the future, but they aren't done expanding so I'm not sure how big they are.

Germany would be in the mix because they are large, but their leadership position is kind of wonky.

Finland says "combined arms?  We're good with iron sights."

W-Fal24-Profile-Ha%E2%95%A0eyha%E2%95%A0

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

Russia is to Poland as ou is to us. With slightly less sister fucking in russia. 

Their hatred for the russkie cocksuckers cannot be over stated.

I think that gives them the edge because once they get started they ain't stopping for shit.

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.



×
×
  • Create New...