Russia's War Against Ukraine

Started by ArizonaTank, November 26, 2021, 04:54:38 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Pete Dero and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

bobarossa

Quote from: MengJiao on March 22, 2023, 09:04:49 AM
Quote from: Gusington on March 22, 2023, 08:15:22 AM^NATO membership still keeps the Russians at bay. But do the Poles, Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, etc. feel threatened enough to strike first despite their NATO membership?

 Well, I kinda suspect, that the calculus of deterrence has changed.  Before Russia more or less unprovoked attacked Ukraine, I think most nations would think NATO would deter the Russians.  After Russia's unprovoked attack on Ukraine, places like Poland may be thinking -- why wait until its too late?  Better get your own deterrence running strong and maybe even pre-empt any Russian moves in your direction because who knows what the Russians will do?  better safe than sorry.
I believe these are similar thoughts (NATO is encroaching on our borders) that went through Russia's paranoid mind before their attack on Ukraine.  That's speaking of Russians who support that attack more than Putins delusions of grandeur.

Windigo

Quote from: Gusington on March 22, 2023, 08:15:22 AM^NATO membership still keeps the Russians at bay. But do the Poles, Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, etc. feel threatened enough to strike first despite their NATO membership?

I wonder outloud if there is a cultural trigger for the eastern NATO members to escalate, that we in the west currently don't recognize, or feel is trivial that could get them going?
My doctor wrote me a prescription for daily sex.

My wife insists that it says dyslexia but what does she know.

MengJiao

Quote from: Gusington on March 22, 2023, 09:14:44 AM^Such a delicate balance. When does deterrence turn into aggression?

Unfortunately for everybody (but especially the Russians, who probably could deter Poland with no trouble at all before Feb 24, 2022) nobody can quite be certain anymore.  Restoring something like a normal Cold War situation may be why China is dabbling in Russia's problems and also why the West thinks dumping fighting gear and cash into Ukraine is the least-bad thing to do in terms of deterrence.

Windigo

Quote from: MengJiao on March 22, 2023, 10:07:32 AM
Quote from: Gusington on March 22, 2023, 09:14:44 AM^Such a delicate balance. When does deterrence turn into aggression?

Unfortunately for everybody (but especially the Russians, who probably could deter Poland with no trouble at all before Feb 24, 2022) nobody can quite be certain anymore.  Restoring something like a normal Cold War situation may be why China is dabbling in Russia's problems and also why the West thinks dumping fighting gear and cash into Ukraine is the least-bad thing to do in terms of deterrence.

Belarus is an interesting card on the table. I bet they are getting communications from all sides.
My doctor wrote me a prescription for daily sex.

My wife insists that it says dyslexia but what does she know.

Gusington

I agree with Bob, above. As Russia moves further west, NATO feels more threatened, and should. The mirror image of what the Russians have been upset about with NATO moving further east for decades, except NATO didn't bomb and destroy Ukraine while trying to make it come closer to NATO.

Remember around 1995 when the West toyed with the idea of a friendly Russia actually joining NATO one day?


слава Україна!

We can't live under the threat of a c*nt because he's threatening nuclear Armageddon.

-JudgeDredd

MikeGER

#6515
Quote from: ArizonaTank on March 22, 2023, 08:20:58 AMSo, how many T-55s will it take to take on a Leopard II?


it will take 38 T55  (because the Leo2A6 has 37 rounds onboard)   :wink:

actually a few less but not much less.
 the Leopards, usualy operating in a group of 4, have to aim and reload and so a large group of tanks showing up simultan may score a softkill on the moving Leopards while old tanks  have to stop to fire, damaging optics, tracks, turret mechanic ... and the Leopard will fall back to get repairs

MengJiao

#6516
Quote from: Gusington on March 22, 2023, 10:12:32 AMI agree with Bob, above. As Russia moves further west, NATO feels more threatened, and should. The mirror image of what the Russians have been upset about with NATO moving further east for decades, except NATO didn't bomb and destroy Ukraine while trying to make it come closer to NATO.

Remember around 1995 when the West toyed with the idea of a friendly Russia actually joining NATO one day?

I think Russians blew the plausibility of the idea that they just want some kind of demilitarized buffer zone
(like Austria was after 1955 in theory) when they annexed the Crimea.  Then I think the whole quasi-genocidal
thing (erasing any Ukrainian identity -- "genocide" means erasing a type, a genus, of persons either by killing them all or taking all their children and re-educating them etc. etc.).  Clearly, something more is going on than the need for a buffer that is farther west.  Of course this brings up the problem of what the Russians "actually" want (which is sort of a major problem since they don't seem to know -- would they really be happier if people would only dislike Harry Potter for the right reasons as the Patriarch seemed to want to imply this time last year?  I doubt it: 
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/03/vladimir-putin-jk-rowling-russia-cancel-culture
)

Skoop

Quote from: Pete Dero on March 22, 2023, 08:49:48 AM
Quote from: ArizonaTank on March 22, 2023, 08:20:58 AMSo, how many T-55s will it take to take on a Leopard II? a Challenger? or an M1?

Maybe that is no longer a hypothetical question.

Didn't M1's take on T-72's in Iraq ?  Not really a balanced engagement. 


But if you believe Russian propaganda M1's are easily defeated by T-55's.

https://tass.com/defense/1567245   (TASS is a Russian 'news' agency)

Abrams tanks repeatedly demonstrated their vulnerability during the hostilities in Iraq, the expert pointed out. "As the Iraq combat experience shows, they went up in flames. The tank turret was pierced by a 100mm armor-piercing blunt nose projectile fired by a T-55 tank. There were instances when Abrams vehicles were struck by automatic guns of both Bradley and our BMP-2 infantry fighting vehicles," he said.

Instances are also known when the American tank was destroyed by the first Soviet modifications of T-72 tanks firing old shells "that were withdrawn from operational use even before the Abrams concept was devised," Suvorov said.

The expert also pointed to the instances when Abrams tanks were wiped out by RPG-7 anti-tank grenade launchers.

The American tank almost has no chances, if it engages in a duel with Russian tanks, the expert said.   :ROFL:

"If an Abrams emerges at a long distance, a T-72 or a T-90 crew will fire an anti-tank missile and we can say that the Abrams will even have no chance to fire a shot as its range of fire won't allow it to do that," he explained.


Russian propaganda will say anything to make themselves feel better.  The part about the ATGM fire from tanks is wrong.  The Abrams sabot round fires at such a high velocity that it would kill the Russian tanks before their ATGMs were even half way there.  Plus they are saclos like a TOW, so the Russian tank has to sit there guiding it in like a sitting duck.  Guess we'll find out soon enough about west vs east armor.

ArizonaTank

Quote from: MikeGER on March 22, 2023, 10:23:29 AM
Quote from: ArizonaTank on March 22, 2023, 08:20:58 AMSo, how many T-55s will it take to take on a Leopard II?


it will take 38 T55  (because the Leo2A6 has 37 rounds onboard)   :wink:

actually a few less but not much less.
 the Leopards, usualy operating in a group of 4, have to aim and reload and so a large group of tanks showing up simultan may score a softkill on the moving Leopards while old tanks  have to stop to fire, damaging optics, tracks, turret mechanic ... and the Leopard will fall back to get repairs

Great points

Combat Mission x2 Cold War actually has T-55s, and a very early M1 (pre M1A1 I believe)...no Leopards sadly.  I suppose I could whip up a quick scenario with 1 M1 vs a company of T-55s just to see what happens...:)
Johannes "Honus" Wagner
"The Flying Dutchman"
Shortstop: Pittsburgh Pirates 1900-1917
Rated as the 2nd most valuable player of all time by Bill James.

Windigo

I just wonder where the UAFs will deploy the armour. In my mind they need a breakout situation in a region where they can really put some miles in and disrupt the hell out of logistics and comms.
My doctor wrote me a prescription for daily sex.

My wife insists that it says dyslexia but what does she know.

Gusington



слава Україна!

We can't live under the threat of a c*nt because he's threatening nuclear Armageddon.

-JudgeDredd

Tripoli

Quote from: ArizonaTank on March 22, 2023, 04:07:56 PM
Quote from: MikeGER on March 22, 2023, 10:23:29 AM
Quote from: ArizonaTank on March 22, 2023, 08:20:58 AMSo, how many T-55s will it take to take on a Leopard II?


it will take 38 T55  (because the Leo2A6 has 37 rounds onboard)   :wink:

actually a few less but not much less.
 the Leopards, usualy operating in a group of 4, have to aim and reload and so a large group of tanks showing up simultan may score a softkill on the moving Leopards while old tanks  have to stop to fire, damaging optics, tracks, turret mechanic ... and the Leopard will fall back to get repairs

Great points

Combat Mission x2 Cold War actually has T-55s, and a very early M1 (pre M1A1 I believe)...no Leopards sadly.  I suppose I could whip up a quick scenario with 1 M1 vs a company of T-55s just to see what happens...:)

I'll play it PBEM/HtH against you as the RED commander.  That way you'll have a human opponent who is approximately as good as a 24 year old Russian company commander in the current war.  :grin:   It might be interesting to post a quick (and it will be quick) video for the benefit of the forum....
"Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?" -Abraham Lincoln

Windigo

I can't watch.... if the western tanks have OEM thermals, it'll be a blood bath
My doctor wrote me a prescription for daily sex.

My wife insists that it says dyslexia but what does she know.

GDS_Starfury

Toonces - Don't ask me, I just close my eyes and take it.

Gus - I use sweatpants with flannel shorts to soak up my crotch sweat.

Banzai Cat - There is no "partial credit" in grammar. Like anal sex. It's either in, or it's not.

Mirth - We learned long ago that they key isn't to outrun Star, it's to outrun Gus.

Martok - I don't know if it's possible to have an "anti-boner"...but I now have one.

Gus - Celery is vile and has no reason to exist. Like underwear on Star.


FarAway Sooner

Quote from: Windigo on March 22, 2023, 04:08:37 PMI just wonder where the UAFs will deploy the armour. In my mind they need a breakout situation in a region where they can really put some miles in and disrupt the hell out of logistics and comms.

I think the old adage is that you use infantry and artillery to create and/or find a weakness, and then punch through with armor once you know where that weakness is.  I'm sure that the Abrams and the Lep2s and the Challengers will be more then a match for any individual Russian tanks.  Just like the Panthers and the Tigers were more than a match for the Shermans.

My own suspicion is that a few hundred modern IFVs will likely prove more decisive than a few dozen modern NATO tanks.  IF the Ukes can get the various systems working together well, we'll be much more likely to see a critical mass of combat ability in a place that overwhelms the Russians.  As the Ukrainians proved quite recently, tanks without infantry support get stretched thin VERY quickly.