Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

Donna Wells2 said:The Russians are basically just barking at the moon at this point.
They’ve burned through their elite weaponry and top-tier units, so now they’re scavenging anyone they can find—even 50-year-old retirees would probably fit the bill right now.
Word is that nearly half of the territorial fighters from the Donbas region have been chewed up and spat out by the meat grinder.
If that's the case, can you even begin to imagine what the total casualty count looks like?

I always look back at the quality gap between Russian gear and Western tech through the lens of the Tiger versus the Sherman tank.
How many Sherman tanks did it take to finally bring down a single Tiger?
Honestly, I suspect that exact same ratio still holds true today when comparing Russian hardware to Western equipment.

True enough, though I’d argue there’s only one functional Tiger left in existence, whereas you can still find a Sherman tank popping up here and there...

brightheron64 said:True enough, though I’d argue there’s only one functional Tiger left in existence, whereas you can still find a Sherman tank popping up here and there...

What on earth does that have to do with actual combat effectiveness?
German weaponry was systematically destroyed following World War II, which is exactly why you don't see much of it left globally.
And isn't it worth noting how the young Israeli state defended itself against aggressors using—among other things—German equipment? Talk about a massive irony, right?
Or should they have just gone with the Sherman tank instead?

brightheron64 said:True enough, though I’d argue there’s only one functional Tiger left in existence, whereas you can still find a Sherman tank popping up here and there...

Like, 1,450 Tigers versus 88,000 Sherman tanks... it’s freaking weird that there are more functional ones from the latter group.

Donna Wells2 said:What on earth does that have to do with actual combat effectiveness?
German weaponry was systematically destroyed following World War II, which is exactly why you don't see much of it left globally.
And isn't it worth noting how the young Israeli state defended itself against aggressors using—among other things—German equipment? Talk about a massive irony, right?
Or should they have just gone with the Sherman tank instead?

Absolutely nothing. It's just as irrelevant as the fact that it took several Ronsons just to take down one single Tiger...

Christian Torres3 said:Like, 1,450 Tigers versus 88,000 Sherman tanks... it’s freaking weird that there are more functional ones from the latter group.

It really is... 😁

Christian Torres3 said:Like, 1,450 Tigers versus 88,000 Sherman tanks... it’s freaking weird that there are more functional ones from the latter group.

Look, the Tiger was an incredibly expensive machine, but the absolute elite of Nazi Germany loved flaunting it. They lived for those photo ops, posing next to what they claimed was the finest weaponry on the planet—the exact same kind of vanity project we see today with Putin trying to replicate.
I guess when you're living under a dictatorship, this kind of posturing is just standard operating procedure, isn't it?

Best,

Bryan Booth82 said:Look, the Tiger was an incredibly expensive machine, but the absolute elite of Nazi Germany loved flaunting it. They lived for those photo ops, posing next to what they claimed was the finest weaponry on the planet—the exact same kind of vanity project we see today with Putin trying to replicate.
I guess when you're living under a dictatorship, this kind of posturing is just standard operating procedure, isn't it?

Best,

The only thing Putin actually possesses that could be considered top-tier is a hypersonic missile... though honestly, does anyone even believe those things are actually hypersonic??

It honestly feels like there’s absolutely nothing left on this planet that can hold back the sheer grit of the brave Ukrainian infantry

Lisa Jackson7 said:Okay, but did those other guys actually defend Ukraine's territorial integrity? Obviously not... so wouldn't a better solution have been setting up some effective oversight of the nuclear weapons inside Ukraine?
Instead, you're expecting guarantees of integrity from a country (Russia) that never even ratified its borders against other former Soviet republics... I mean, who's the crazy one here?
But wait, there's more... now that we've already been hit, we're going to force Russia to pay war reparations, and after that, nobody will want anything to do with them—let them all collectively go back to the Stone Age, etc.
You can say, "Fine," but I don't think it's just Ukraine—the rest of Europe won't be thrilled about having a massive failed state right next door, probably filled with all sorts of exotic dictators and mafias, where someone also has to worry about... well, nuclear missiles and whatever else.
An empire of multinational corporations and paramilitary groups... absolutely priceless.

Nobody has to force anyone into anything. There is no coercion. Simply offer them a firm promise: all sanctions will be lifted once they pay the war reparations. They should probably take a moment to think it over and reach an agreement with the Americans regarding the amount and the method of payment.

Donna Wells2 said:The only thing Putin actually possesses that could be considered top-tier is a hypersonic missile... though honestly, does anyone even believe those things are actually hypersonic??

It’s entirely possible they have them; why wouldn't they? They certainly possess the technical know-how to engineer high-end weaponry.
The real question isn't about quality, it's about scale. How much can they actually churn out?

Nazi Germany faced this exact dilemma during World War II. They were obsessed with developing "wonder weapons," but fortunately for the rest of the world, they couldn't mass-produce them fast enough.

I was recently watching a documentary about the tank battles near Kursk, featuring a surviving German tanker who had been operating a Tiger
tank. He described how they were simply overrun by the sheer, overwhelming sea of Russian armor.
His point was simple: you can destroy one, then another, then a third—because a Tiger is undeniably superior in a vacuum—but when you're facing an endless tide, you just don't stand a chance.

I believe Russia is running into a modern version of that same problem: a massive quantity of relatively mediocre hardware balanced against a very limited supply of top-tier equipment.
If you look at their staggering losses, it's clear that the tactical lessons of World War II are still playing out today, even against a significantly smaller force.

And what on earth would happen if they actually went head-to-head with... NATO?
LP

Bryan Booth82 said:It’s entirely possible they have them; why wouldn't they? They certainly possess the technical know-how to engineer high-end weaponry.
The real question isn't about quality, it's about scale. How much can they actually churn out?

Nazi Germany faced this exact dilemma during World War II. They were obsessed with developing "wonder weapons," but fortunately for the rest of the world, they couldn't mass-produce them fast enough.

I was recently watching a documentary about the tank battles near Kursk, featuring a surviving German tanker who had been operating a Tiger
tank. He described how they were simply overrun by the sheer, overwhelming sea of Russian armor.
His point was simple: you can destroy one, then another, then a third—because a Tiger is undeniably superior in a vacuum—but when you're facing an endless tide, you just don't stand a chance.

I believe Russia is running into a modern version of that same problem: a massive quantity of relatively mediocre hardware balanced against a very limited supply of top-tier equipment.
If you look at their staggering losses, it's clear that the tactical lessons of World War II are still playing out today, even against a significantly smaller force.

And what on earth would happen if they actually went head-to-head with... NATO?
LP

I mean, honestly? I think Putin is his own worst enemy at this point. He's basically just sending young guys to die in conquest wars just so he can leave some kind of "legacy" behind. Between that and the fact that Russia is still feeling the demographic holes left over from World War II, they wouldn't stand a chance against NATO even if they tried using those old strategies. Russia is pretty much finished—one way or another.

Donna Wells2 said:The Russians are basically just barking at the moon at this point.
They’ve burned through their elite weaponry and top-tier units, so now they’re scavenging anyone they can find—even 50-year-old retirees would probably fit the bill right now.
Word is that nearly half of the territorial fighters from the Donbas region have been chewed up and spat out by the meat grinder.
If that's the case, can you even begin to imagine what the total casualty count looks like?

I always look back at the quality gap between Russian gear and Western tech through the lens of the Tiger versus the Sherman tank.
How many Sherman tanks did it take to finally bring down a single Tiger?
Honestly, I suspect that exact same ratio still holds true today when comparing Russian hardware to Western equipment.

The truth is, the Tiger was essentially a defensive machine. At one point, it might have been the finest tank on the planet, but it was built for holding ground, not for sweeping through territory.

pilif12 said:Putin pushed Finland and Sweden straight into NATO, Switzerland finally spoke up, Ukrainians love their country more than ever, Moldova got its status, and Europe isn't buying their gas or oil anymore. Putin's doing a great job.

☕Yeah, right—he’s basically tanking his own future here. All he's got left to do is touch one more NATO member and he'll be looking at enough legal trouble to retire early behind bars...

Peter Barnes said:The truth is, the Tiger was essentially a defensive machine. At one point, it might have been the finest tank on the planet, but it was built for holding ground, not for sweeping through territory.

No way.

pilif12 said:Putin pushed Finland and Sweden straight into NATO, Switzerland finally spoke up, Ukrainians are more patriotic than ever, Moldova got its status, and Europe isn't buying gas or oil anymore. Putin's doing a great job.

Europe is still buying Russian oil—no real plans to cut it off entirely.

As for stopping gas imports? Nobody’s even thinking about that.

Ukraine officially gains EU candidate status

https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2...s-to-join-bloc

Amanda Allen4 said:Ukraine officially gains EU candidate status

https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2...s-to-join-bloc

The vultures are circling now.😁

feralcanyon73 said:It honestly feels like there’s absolutely nothing left on this planet that can hold back the sheer grit of the brave Ukrainian infantry

In which direction?
The reality on the ground just isn't looking great for the Ukrainians right now.

feralhawk45 said:In which direction?
The reality on the ground just isn't looking great for the Ukrainians right now.

We really need to draw a line here between the aggressor and the person defending their own home.
For an aggressor, the clock is ticking loudly. Every second spent in active combat matters because their "operating window" and the sheer amount of effort they have to pour into this is vastly greater and strictly limited.
Furthermore, for an aggressor, success is measured solely by offensive momentum. Once they shift to a defensive posture, they’re essentially staring at the beginning of the end—because playing defense is nothing more than a massive drain on resources with absolutely zero payoff.

The Ukrainians have time; the Russians don't.
It seems to me that the Ukrainians have received excellent strategic advice: make the cost of aggression so prohibitively high that the Russians can't sustain it.
And honestly? I think they're nailing it.
Best regards,

analogbear5 said:Europe is still buying Russian oil—no real plans to cut it off entirely.

As for stopping gas imports? Nobody’s even thinking about that.

We're moving toward alternatives, don't worry. It's definitely not going to be easy, but it's something we have to do.

Christian Torres3 said:No way.

Exactly, tigar was an offensive weapon.

The Jagdtiger, built on essentially the same modified chassis, was more of a defensive tool. Since it had a fixed superstructure rather than a turret, it wasn't meant for maneuvering in direct combat. It was designed to dig in at a camouflaged position and rain hell from a distance, thanks to that massive 128mm gun and incredibly heavy armor—we're talking over 70 tons. No tank from that era could survive a hit from it. They didn't make many, though, and between the sheer weight and the weak engine, they never really made a mark on the battlefield.