War

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
The State Duma deputy predicted the extension of the conflict in Ukraine until 2030.
A solution to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict will be found by 2030. With such an opinion in a conversation with a URA.RU correspondent, State Duma Deputy for Defense Andrey Gurulev spoke.

“According to my forecasts, stabilization of the situation [in Ukraine] and some kind of solution will be found in 2027-2030,” Gurulev said. According to him, such a lengthy resolution of the conflict is associated with a new world order and world order, as well as with tense military situations in different parts of the world.

Earlier, Russian Army General Vladimir Boldyrev predicted that the special operation in Ukraine would not end in the next six months . The official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, believes that the United States plans to drag out the conflict until 2025, People's News of Russia notes . And ex-US officer Scott Ritter spoke with the opinion that Russia could win in Ukraine in the summer of 2023, according to the Federal News Agency

NATO had a hand in UAF attacks on Russian airfields, Gavrilov said
NATO members helped Kyiv attack Russian airfields, Konstantin Gavrilov, head of the Moscow delegation at the talks in Vienna on military security and arms control, told RIA Novosti.

As the diplomat recalled, Russia has repeatedly pointed out that the West, led by the United States, is increasingly drawn into the conflict, becoming its participant.

So he answered the question about the existence of evidence of NATO's involvement in the attack.

"Now, once again, the facts indicate that the member countries of the North Atlantic Alliance really had a hand in Kyiv's terrorist provocations against the Russian strategic airfields of Diaghilevo and Engels," Gavrilov said.

He recalled the words of the Latvian Foreign Minister on November 30 in the NATO Council, who said that "possible Ukrainian strikes on military targets deep in Russia would be justified."

He also said that US representatives participated in the technical preparations for the attack.

“During 2022, work was carried out at the Kharkiv Aviation Plant to modernize the aforementioned UAVs with the participation of specialists from the Kiev design bureau Luch and the American corporation Raytheon Technologies. The range of this drone is up to 1,000 kilometers,” the head of the delegation said.

Gavrilov added that it is clear to Moscow in which direction they planned to use the drone after the modernization. At the same time, as the diplomat emphasized, most of the targets on which the Armed Forces of Ukraine strike are "determined by the Western masters of the Kyiv regime."

Using various space systems for reconnaissance and information support of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, including for the purpose of opening places deployment, routes of movement and actions of Russian troops," Gavrilov said.

“The aforementioned Tu-141 Strizh UAVs are aimed at the target using the American global GPS satellite system. By the way, the United States and its allies have long been actively using various space systems for reconnaissance and information support of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, including for the purpose of opening places deployment, routes of movement and actions of Russian troops," Gavrilov said.

He added that now Washington in Ukraine in real combat conditions is working out new methods of using civilian satellite constellations as an element of command of the US Armed Forces. As Gavrilov emphasized, at the same time, NATO representatives "do not care at all" that their actions could jeopardize peaceful space activities and undermine its international legal foundations.

According to the Ministry of Defense, on Monday Kiev tried to attack military airfields in the Saratov and Ryazan regions using Soviet-made UAVs.

The military department clarified that Russian aviation, using air defense systems, shot down Ukrainian drones flying at low altitude. According to the military, during the fall and explosion of fragments of drones at airfields, the skin of the hull of two aircraft was slightly damaged. As a result of the attack, three military technical personnel were killed, four more were injured.

In retaliation, Russia launched a massive strike against the Ukrainian military command system and related defense complex facilities, which disrupted the transfer of troops and foreign weapons by rail to the combat areas. According to the Ministry of Defense, despite the attempts of the Kyiv regime to disrupt the combat work of Russian long-range aviation, it hit all 17 designated targets.

Kiev, through the words of an anonymous "high-ranking Ukrainian official" in The Washington Post, admitted responsibility for attempted attacks on Russian airfields near Saratov , Ryazan and Kursk. The interlocutor of the publication, despite the official silence on the part of the country's authorities, said that "these were Ukrainian drones."

This was the second such unofficial recognition of Kiev through major American media: the day before, The New York Times, citing a "Ukrainian official," wrote that the drones "were launched from the territory of Ukraine."
good, it's about time we did more than watch from the sidelines.
but...2030? they're fucking dreaming, another year of these sanctions and they won't have outhouses to throw with trebuchet...
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
that isn't them producing their own long range drones, that is them producing long range drones with a NATO member nation...
not that i care even a fucking tiny amount...but call a duck a duck.
America can also make its own bilateral defense arrangements outside NATO, other members can too. Their involvement need not be public or known, they can be assembled in any warehouse in western Ukraine with container loads of parts coming from Poland like most other things most of the parts could come from China, blame them! I posted a tweet awhile back that seemed to indicate some sort of joint venture by the flags on the wall and the drones they were mass producing looked like they could do the job from what I could see in the photo.

The point is, it is not expensive or difficult for a country like Ukraine to have this capability and it would be foolish at this point not to. Why they could be holding back has been discussed here before, but I believe they can strike deep into Russia with a 10- or 20-thousand-dollar drones carrying around 100 pounds of HE, enough to demolish most targets. I saw a video of one early in the war crashing into a Russian facility and they have been dropping them all over Crimea.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
America can also make its own bilateral defense arrangements outside NATO, other members can too. Their involvement need not be public or known, they can be assembled in any warehouse in western Ukraine with container loads of parts coming from Poland like most other things most of the parts could come from China, blame them! I posted a tweet awhile back that seemed to indicate some sort of joint venture by the flags on the wall and the drones they were mass producing looked like they could do the job from what I could see in the photo.

The point is, it is not expensive or difficult for a country like Ukraine to have this capability and it would be foolish at this point not to. Why they could be holding back has been discussed here before, but I believe they can strike deep into Russia with a 10- or 20-thousand-dollar drones carrying around 100 pounds of HE, enough to demolish most targets. I saw a video of one early in the war crashing into a Russian facility and they have been dropping them all over Crimea.
you can call it whatever you want to, but russia is going to call it a NATO member participating in the war and could easily use it as an excuse to use chemical or nuclear weapons.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
you can call it whatever you want to, but russia is going to call it a NATO member participating in the war and could easily use it as an excuse to use chemical or nuclear weapons.
They will grasp at any straw they can find, which is why Uncle Sam geofenced the HIMARs to keep them out of Russia. Geofencing is sometimes used with RC model planes and drones to keep them in a given area, it is a mode of operation that can be setup as an option on the flight control computer.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Putin's mouthpiece in America, another Bagdad Bob. Tucker should go on a fact-finding mission to Ukraine, since he talks about it so much, I think he would be lucky to get out alive! :lol: Listen to this drivel of not even half fact, but lies, no obligation to the truth or facts whatsoever, straight up Russian propaganda, his writers didn't even need to work, just copy and paste from Russian bullshit.

Just for money? How hard up are these assholes for cash to whore like this? Morality and ethics, what are they?

 

doublejj

Well-Known Member
Putin's mouthpiece in America, another Bagdad Bob. Tucker should go on a fact-finding mission to Ukraine, since he talks about it so much, I think he would be lucky to get out alive! :lol: Listen to this drivel of not even half fact, but lies, no obligation to the truth or facts whatsoever, straight up Russian propaganda, his writers didn't even need to work, just copy and paste from Russian bullshit.

Just for money? How hard up are these assholes for cash to whore like this? Morality and ethics, what are they?

Why Do the Russians Trust the Church Set Up By the KGB?
 

CCGNZ

Well-Known Member
the Zumwalt-class frigates were a bad spend imo.
Absolutely agree,the navy keeps trying to find ways to re-purpose these 3 ships as they cannot fill their original intent,the rail gun fiasco is the definition of my procurement rant,I know upping the game in the technology race w/near peer competitors is important,but sometimes the whiz kids just go to far of which Zumwalt is a prime example,all the $ wasted on that program while the Navy has to use Burke destroyers for missions that a smaller frigate should do and w/retirement of the Perry class almost 20 yrs. have gone by w/no frigates in the fleet,a incredible lack of foresight that i hope we don't pay for in blood.
 

CCGNZ

Well-Known Member
Going for Tawain means war with the allies, not just Uncle Sam, but the west in general, shit the globe! We get almost all our advanced semiconductors from Tawain and China gets theirs from them too. Any attack would see these facilities destroyed and their highly trained and skilled workers dead or turned into refugees and scattered. It would mean instant war with the US, UK, EU, Aus, NZ, Japan, South Korea and all the Asian tigers in the region including Vietnam! Uncle Sam would have more enthusiastic company on this one than in Ukraine. China would be up against most of its trading partners and their economy would collapse FFS.
Taiwan is quite the dilemma,it's akin somewhat to if the south fled to Cuba in the Civil war and established a independent Gov. there that the North let go. Then China is arming it and telling us not to invade,not a identical situation but close. What would the US position in that scenario be? So I completely understand the Chinese being irritated as hell concerning this. At the same time the US watching China swallow up Taiwan while standing by idly would obliterate Uncle Sam's standing as THE defender of freedom and democracy. Adding to that I have much respect for the 24 million Taiwanese who have forged a democracy and a great high tech economy and want nothing to do w/the heavy handed autocratic surveillance state run by CCP,as for deals look no further than Hong Kong. The clock is ticking as China is growing tired of the status quo. I remember a quote from Adm. Yammamoto while his fellow officers were celebrating the Pearl harbor attack in which he said America's industrial might was awesome. China has way more ship building capacity than the US does now. Their ships in general are much newer and the quality gap is shrinking as we speak. The US spent the cold war dividend flushing $ on many failed,ill conceived,or systems not deployed on the proposed timeline.I still believe we have the best trained most professional forces but we have made many blunders in equipping them. I know that China also has it's weaknesses,lack of experience,the one child policy that is aging their pop.,and it's own corruption and truth to power issues.All of that said I wish there was a mediated way to avoid a conflict acceptable to both China and Taiwan but I certainly can't envision one,any ideas?
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Taiwan is quite the dilemma,it's akin somewhat to if the south fled to Cuba in the Civil war and established a independent Gov. there that the North let go. Then China is arming it and telling us not to invade,not a identical situation but close. What would the US position in that scenario be? So I completely understand the Chinese being irritated as hell concerning this. At the same time the US watching China swallow up Taiwan while standing by idly would obliterate Uncle Sam's standing as THE defender of freedom and democracy. Adding to that I have much respect for the 24 million Taiwanese who have forged a democracy and a great high tech economy and want nothing to do w/the heavy handed autocratic surveillance state run by CCP,as for deals look no further than Hong Kong. The clock is ticking as China is growing tired of the status quo. I remember a quote from Adm. Yammamoto while his fellow officers were celebrating the Pearl harbor attack in which he said America's industrial might was awesome. China has way more ship building capacity than the US does now. Their ships in general are much newer and the quality gap is shrinking as we speak. The US spent the cold war dividend flushing $ on many failed,ill conceived,or systems not deployed on the proposed timeline.I still believe we have the best trained most professional forces but we have made many blunders in equipping them. I know that China also has it's weaknesses,lack of experience,the one child policy that is aging their pop.,and it's own corruption and truth to power issues.All of that said I wish there was a mediated way to avoid a conflict acceptable to both China and Taiwan but I certainly can't envision one,any ideas?
I think with the fall of Russia Joe gave Xi the green light in central Asia where there is oil, gas and everything China needs. The Russian empire might break up in the near future and there are time zones of virgin forest there and weak links to Europe. China can use its position and soft power to control a good chuck of eastern Asia, if they play by the rules and do it with soft economic power. They get all the economic benefits and none of the political trouble by using soft economic power and owning the mines and factories in these new countries. Going west and north for them is the path of least resistance and most profit, going east to Tawain they would be going up against a wall of resistance and their own doom. We are ok with them cutting deals with central Asia for oil and gas and taking advantage of Russia's collapse in Asia. There is opportunity west and north, doom heading east and south by trying to control the south China sea.
 
Top