• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Russia invading Ukraine (NEWS/UPDATES)

Status
Not open for further replies.
MonkeyLove said:
Eh? In none of those scenarios you have listed were drones used in a war like scenario.

Israel has no interest at the moment in invading Lebanon or Gaza.
The US weren’t trying to invade Syria or Iraq
Same with Afghanistan.

The only example where drones have been used recently on the front line is in Armenia/Azerbaijan where Armenia lost over 4,000 men the vast majority through Drone based air strikes they had no answer to and therefore had to surrender.

Prior to that they were exchanging heavy fire and artillery in a stalemate. Azerbaijan employed Turkish TB2 drones and they were a game changer.

So if Russia want to take land (Not just do a targeted killing from the sky) they will need to hammer Ukrainian front lines before they send in troops and tanks. Otherwise the Ukrainians have the ability to cause massive damage to their tanks with the javelins etc… that the West have supplied them.

So I do see drones being very important for Russia to soften up the Ukrainian front lines and if they can’t defend against them they will be sitting ducks. Without drones Russia has to engage in ground combat against dug in positions which will be a bloodbath for them
Click to expand...
Honest question: How do you defend against drones?
 

MonkeyLove said:
Eh? In none of those scenarios you have listed were drones used in a war like scenario.

Israel has no interest at the moment in invading Lebanon or Gaza.
The US weren’t trying to invade Syria or Iraq
Same with Afghanistan.

The only example where drones have been used recently on the front line is in Armenia/Azerbaijan where Armenia lost over 4,000 men the vast majority through Drone based air strikes they had no answer to and therefore had to surrender.

Prior to that they were exchanging heavy fire and artillery. Azerbaijan employed Turkish TB2 drones and they were a game changer.

So if Russia want to take land (Not just do a targeted killing from the sky) they will need to hammer Ukrainian front lines before they send in troops and tanks. Otherwise the Ukrainians have the ability to cause massive damage to their tanks with the javelins etc… that the West have supplied them.

So I do see drones being very important for Russia to soften up the Ukrainian front lines and if they can’t defend against them they will be sitting ducks. Without drones Russia has to engage in ground combat against dug in positions which will be a bloodbath for them
Click to expand...
Of course they are war-like scenarios and even if you disagree, they have the same limited effect. Drones can be used to kill people, destroy locations and equipment but they can't occupy any ground that is won and ultimately, that's were the highest toll and demand for personnel is likely to come for the aggressor.

The Azeris didn't have to face that problem because Russia sent in troops to maintain order.

You're managing to miss the main point, there is no strategic gain for Russia in invading Ukraine because they have no way to hold onto it. They could nuke the place and still have the same problem.
nahwee said:
Honest question: How do you defend against drones?
Click to expand...
Short range air defence systems, they're used to defend oil and gas installations.
 
Last edited:
r@mside said:
Of course they are war-like scenarios and even if you disagree, they have the same limited effect. Drones can be used to kill people, destroy locations and equipment but they can't occupy any ground that is won and ultimately, that's were the highest toll and demand for personnel is likely to come for the aggressor.

The Azeris didn't have to face that problem because Russia sent in troops to maintain order.

You're managing to miss the main point, there is no strategic gain for Russia in invading Ukraine because they have no way to hold onto it. They could nuke the place and still have the same problem.
Click to expand...

Who is saying drones need to be able to hold land?

Surely the point is they clear the way for ground forces.

In Armenia it was a stalemate for weeks with heavy fire and artillery exchanging between Armenia and Azerbaijan and the latter were making little headway.

They take out most of the Armenian front lines with drones and then ground troops can waltz in behind and secure the territory. What problems would Azerbaijan have had in holding the land if they had already killed all the Armenian defence in a pre drone onslaught?

Russia will have to hold land hence why they are looking for signs of national guard/military police and logistics. But also if Kiev falls or a Russian leaning administration goes in then they will hold it simply through Ukrainian deflection if the police etc stays inline with the new admin
 
MonkeyLove said:
Who is saying drones need to be able to hold land?

Surely the point is they clear the way for ground forces.

In Armenia it was a stalemate for weeks with heavy fire and artillery exchanging between Armenia and Azerbaijan and the latter were making little headway.

They take out most of the Armenian front lines with drones and then ground troops can waltz in behind and secure the territory. What problems would Azerbaijan have had in holding the land if they had already killed all the Armenian defence in a pre drone onslaught?

Russia will have to hold land hence why they are looking for signs of national guard/military police and logistics. But also if Kiev falls or a Russian leaning administration goes in then they will hold it simply through Ukrainian deflection if the police etc stays inline with the new admin
Click to expand...
You forgot to factor why Armenia couldn't match the Azeri military strength and why its defensive ally refused to get involved beyond observer status and enforcement of the ceasefire treaty.

You know, the strategic element. Countries could have poured arms into that conflict and kept it going if they were prepared to allow Armenia to sink into bottomless debt.

So far, no-one has put forward a plausible strategic argument for an invasion of Ukraine, it mostly revolves around improbable notions of Putin being some sort of demented Machiavelli who wants to restore the old Soviet Empire in his own image.

The reality is probably closer to what all countries are concerned about; the protection of its own borders, the people it has responsibility to defend and what they deem as fair access to trade markets. That wouldn't involve invasion of Ukraine, some skirmishes in contested regions perhaps, increasing arms to resistance groups likely and political interference almost certainly.
 
Germany offered Ukraine 5000 helmets.

You must be logged on to see external links

This after the German admiral offered sympathy to Putin.

EU army.
 
The US have just officially responded to their requests with a big fuck off to all so will be interesting to see how the next few days play out
 
Trouble is that the West is fairly week right now and Putin has been playing these games of brinkmanship longer than anyone and doesn't have to care about public reaction. Biden doesn't want to get involved, Johnson has enough domestic problems, there's a new un-tested German Chancellor and Macron has elections on the way.
 
Darlo1973 said:
Trouble is that the West is fairly week right now and Putin has been playing these games of brinkmanship longer than anyone and doesn't have to care about public reaction. Biden doesn't want to get involved, Johnson has enough domestic problems, there's a new un-tested German Chancellor and Macron has elections on the way.
Click to expand...
We've been saying Ukraine has been "on the brink of invasion" from 100,000 Russian troops ever since it annexed Crimea.
 
r@mside said:
We've been saying Ukraine has been "on the brink of invasion" from 100,000 Russian troops ever since it annexed Crimea.
Click to expand...

Perhaps Putin has decided that now is the time, especially with a rising fuel prices on the way and he has the power to cut supplies to Europe.
 
Darlo1973 said:
Perhaps Putin has decided that now is the time, especially with a rising fuel prices on the way and he has the power to cut supplies to Europe.
Click to expand...
I'd imagine yesterdays warning about pulling the rug on the new pipeline is a hope that some of the oligarchs might reign things in a bit, how beholden Putin is to those with the money is the unknown.
 
The
You must be logged on to see external links
that it would be difficult to impose meaningful directed economic sanctions against key Russian players given what a slut the UK has been for dirty Russian (or whoever) money flooding in to 'Londongrad' for the last few years and how opaque it's allowed ownership of investment to be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top