Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well they cut of water in 2014 too. That problem has only recently been resolved with the invasion, when the Russians blow up the dam that was blocking the water. Chimera can get water and power from Russia. But I'm sure that probably played a roll in Putin's decision to invade the Ukraine and create a land bridge.
Russia will now lose the area of the dam to Ukraine, who will promptly dam up the water. The water problem in Crimea will never go away. That's why I think whoever occupies Crimea must have the lower portion of Ukraine up to the Dnipro river.
Someone on another thread said hey, it worked! — when I objected that I still can’t fathom a rational reason why two civilian targets were chosen (over military ones) as a ‘demonstration.’ So: to this day we have patriotic Americans endorsing what I still consider to be a depraved choice.
However, their point remains. It worked. I don’t see why patriotic Russian sentiments would run any differently. They’re the same species, after all.
Back when I was in high school, at the height of the Cold War, I had a classmate assure us, at the ripe old age of fifteen, and with a notable smirk on her face, too, that nuclear war, specifically MAD, was never going to happen. She gave all the usual reasons that continue to be offered, including on c-d, why it was a slam dunk no-go. I stared at her in amazement of both her self-assurance and her blind trust. Really, I must have had my bottom jaw visibly dropping. I was so astounded that I still remember the moment, thirty eight years later. And guess what. She was right. Up to now.
What Laurel did not know and did not figure into her predictive calculus is that our leaders and military have always been planning for the possibility and even the eventuality of war involving nuclear weapons. Whole military careers have been spent solely planning for nuclear war, however contained or widespread it may potentially become. It is always a realistic option, as far as the DoD is concerned. There are decades’ worth of defense planning around every nuclear exchange contingency, right down to the nitty gritty details of how to dispose of thousands of radioactive corpses safely.
In those plans, we, the little peons, are truly just collateral damage should we become a radioactive hunk of decaying flesh. Nevertheless, a million such hunks is considered mathematically and methodically in the predictive actuarial tables of the nuclear possibilities.
My longish point is that, while a nuclear exchange doesn’t make sense to you, or to me, or to many, many people — so much so that, like in the case of my high school classmate, it causes them to dismiss the possibility altogether — it does make sense to those in charge of our lives. They have dropped the bombs before, and, as my previous patriotic responder commented, they believe it works. It did work, didn’t it? Did Hiroshima and Nagasaki make Japan uninhabitable? No. The bombs dropped on those cities were low yield, so the fallout dissipated fairly quickly, while demonstrating that their power could obliterate cities and kill hundreds of thousands in a virtual flash.
So yes, using nuclear bombs makes sense to many. And it even worked, as one time in history showed. Those for whom it makes sense (I.e., the ones in charge of our lives) have built the ultimate prepper bunkers, to which they will be whisked off at a moment’s notice should the need arise. There’s a plan in place for the transport there as well. The rest of us peons will have to make do with duck-and-cover, our own stashes of Spam and canned peaches squirreled away in basements and amateur bunkers, and murder, mayhem, and cannibalism. The DoD has accounted for all that, too.
(And to any who may wonder or are confused about where I stand on all of this, I personally believe it a brand of human madness, pure and simple).
Many years have passed since your high school exchange. MAD used to be true, but no longer. The only thing that is assured now is the destruction of Russia should they use nuclear weapons.
Gen Ben Hodges, former commander of European forces, has pointed out it would not be necessary for the US to use nuclear weapons. Today, thanks to stealth technology and high precision missiles, Russia could be taken down in a matter of days. There would be no "nuclear exchange" even if there were a nuclear attack.
Russia knows all this. They have not tested a nuclear device for over 30 years, and, as we are seeing, have not maintained their military equipment in just as long. With a shelf life of 25 years, Russia nuclear count is a meaningless as their old tank count, which reported 10,000 tanks.
They may fire off a nuke. It might work, too. But Russia's days of having a viable military could then be counted on your fingers.
Russia attacked apartment buildings - is that all the Russian military can do? They are so weak it’s not funny anymore. Their only strategy is to create fear in the general public, thinking that’s what will get them victories.
“Deadly missile attacks on Zaporizhzhia have been followed up by another strike on the Ukrainian city, local officials said Thursday.
The alleged bombardment came several hours after pre-dawn missile attacks on the southern Ukrainian city left one person dead and seven hospitalised, including a three-year-old girl.â€
Many years have passed since your high school exchange. MAD used to be true, but no longer. The only thing that is assured now is the destruction of Russia should they use nuclear weapons.
Gen Ben Hodges, former commander of European forces, has pointed out it would not be necessary for the US to use nuclear weapons. Today, thanks to stealth technology and high precision missiles, Russia could be taken down in a matter of days. There would be no "nuclear exchange" even if there were a nuclear attack.
Russia knows all this. They have not tested a nuclear device for over 30 years, and, as we are seeing, have not maintained their military equipment in just as long. With a shelf life of 25 years, Russia nuclear count is a meaningless as their old tank count, which reported 10,000 tanks.
They may fire off a nuke. It might work, too. But Russia's days of having a viable military could then be counted on your fingers.
I've read this in several places. NATO forces conduct military exercises all the time with how this would all be coordinated.
It is no secret where Russia keeps nuclear warheads on land. They would be destroyed within hours. Sea based nuclear warheads might take a bit longer.
Drones combined with Lockheed Martin Himar system is what wreaking havoc on Russians. Himar (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System) accuracy is high combined with a drone Russians are sitting ducks. Ukraine only has a small number of 50 mile range systems Biden is sending more now.
Let's not get gadget crazy. A professional army with a well-trained NCO cadre, motivated soldiers and seriously brilliant operational leadership is wreaking havoc on the Russians. Certain high-tech weapons act as force multipliers, certainly. But "multiplier" should be taken quite literally in this context. They're working so well because there's a well-running army ready to latch on the the smallest advantage.
Books will be written on the Ukrainian campaign. And on the decline and fall of Russia.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
