Russian special military operation in Ukraine #28

mnztr wrote:Hmm apparently the Ukrainians captured a T90M. Is this a pretty recent mod? Bad news?

Belisarius wrote:

Podlodka77 wrote:
Our air defense cannot cope with so many cruise missiles and kamikaze UAVs at the same time, the Russian army is deliberately overloading our system.

ALAMO wrote:

Podlodka77 wrote:
Our air defense cannot cope with so many cruise missiles and kamikaze UAVs at the same time, the Russian army is deliberately overloading our system.

It is just an excuse.
To this very date, the number of missiles they managed to shoot down is pathetic.
Can be calculated on hands for the last several months and some 2000+ missiles involved.
There is no inaccesibiity factor, as each shoot down missile felt down on their uncontested territory.
We have a few Ch-59, maybe 2-3 Calibrs ... and that would be much of it.
They never were able to shoot them down at any reasonable rate, and there are multiple reports that at least cruise missiles have some kind of on board ECM suit.
This war proves an exceptional potency of the Russkie missiles, and that includes a really old examples like Ch-22.

LMFS wrote:Ishchenko, from yesterday, demonstrating how real professionals think:

Crimean Bridge: Will Russia respond to the Ukrainian terror? And most importantly, how?

While congratulating Putin on his birthday, Ramzan Kadyrov called him, along with his father, Akhmad-Haji Kadyrov, the savior of the Chechen people. And this is not an exaggeration. The Federal army had never been particularly ceremonious before, and after the bombings of residential buildings in Moscow and Buinaksk, it was ready to wipe out the whole of Chechnya, which would have happened if Putin and Kadyrov hadn't started the peace process. At least modern Grozny is beautiful not only because a lot of money was allocated for its restoration, but also due to the almost complete disappearance of the old Grozny.
Ukraine congratulated Putin on his birthday with the explosion on the Crimean Bridge. Of course, the Crimean Bridge is a transport artery that also feeds front-line units. But the strike was not carried out in the course of hostilities, not by people in uniform attacking the object from the sea or from the air, but by persons masquerading as civilians.
In accordance with traditional views, a spy differs from a scout not in that he is their spy, but our scout, but in that a scout performs his duties in the form of his own army (like front-line intelligence, partisans of the Medvedev, Kovpak, Fedorov and many other detachments led by the Central Headquarters of the partisan movement), while a spy is disguised in civilian or in someone else's uniform (disguised). Therefore, scouts were considered prisoners of war like the rest, and spies were hanged, periodically hanged now, although now the age is more humane and they prefer to rot in prison for decades, waiting for the moment when they get their spy and it will be possible to arrange an exchange.
The activity of people disguised as civilians and committing sabotage behind enemy lines (even if you are waging a war with them) qualifies as terrorism, and they themselves are terrorists. Thus, the explosion on the Crimean Bridge is an act of terror.

The good news is that the builders ' claims about the high design strength of the bridge were confirmed: the explosion of several tons of explosives collapsed only two spans. Railway and automobile communication with Crimea was restored on the same day.
The rest of the news is bad. The worst part is probably that if you can arrange an explosion at such a carefully guarded object as the Crimean Bridge, the sabotage against which has been announced many times, then you can arrange an explosion anywhere. What prevents, for example, from blowing up the same truck on the Moscow Ring Road, where there will be much more victims during rush hour? And if you blow up ten of them at the same time in different places, the psychological effect will be not ten, but a hundred times greater, and it will spread to the whole country.
In general, if war can come to the Crimean Bridge, then it can come to every house.
But intimidating the population was clearly not a priority for those who planned this terrorist attack. Otherwise, they would have chosen a different place (for example, a market where everyone can find themselves in their own city and where there would be much more victims, which means that the public's impression of the event would be much more powerful).
The Crimean Bridge is a symbol of the Russian spring of 2014, a symbol of a bloodless victory, the beginning of the reunification of Russian lands, and Russia's return to the rank of a superpower in international politics. His attack is a challenge to the Russian state and society. The fact that it was made on the day of the 70th anniversary of the President of Russia should have increased the effect.

The United States said that this was a Ukrainian amateur act. I don't think. The Ukrainians could have killed Daria Dugina on their own initiative. Neither she nor her father could stop the Americans, and the murder of a young girl always leads to the conviction of murderers mostly normal people, in whatever country they live. In the United States, this is well known, so they are trying to organize sacred victims of their Maidans from girls in white blouses.
But the Crimean Bridge is too serious a strategic target for the Ukrainians to decide to attack it without US approval. In addition, Kiev has talked for so long about its intention to destroy it, without ever being condemned by the Americans for these plans, which can be considered approval received long ago and publicly.
The fact that the Americans quite correctly calculated the reaction of Russian society is evidenced by the fact that in the public space of Russia there was an immediate demand not just to respond to Ukraine, but to respond with a nuclear strike. The United States has been promoting the topic of an imminent Russian nuclear strike on Ukraine for a couple of months. Most recently, Zelensky screwed them up by demanding a preemptive nuclear strike on Russia. With the terrorist attack on the Crimean Bridge, they win back information losses — once again, the demands for a nuclear strike are heard from Russia.
Now, if the Americans organize a nuclear provocation, the sequence of events will be presented by Washington as follows::
- Ukraine, allegedly without the consent of the United States, arranges sabotage against the Crimean Bridge;
— since the Crimean Bridge has a sacred meaning for Russia, the population is excited and demands nuclear revenge;
- Putin, stung by the attack on his birthday, agrees;
— and here you have a nuclear explosion over Kiev or Lviv.
And no one will make any investigations or listen to any excuses. The Western press will declare Russia a nuclear terrorist, and its president "lost international legitimacy", launch a campaign against the "Russian barbarians" and begin to consolidate against Russia all those who can be intimidated. The country's overall international situation will worsen. How much worse it will get is a question. Traditional allies will most likely not turn away from Russia, but there may be questions about various Afro-Asian trifles. And in Latin America, some of the positions are likely to be lost.

The current situation requires Moscow to respond to the attack on the bridge. The answer is hard, open, but non-nuclear. A variant of such an answer may be a massive raid on the Ukrainian capital of strategic aviation.
There are enough government offices, barracks, bridges, factories, thermal power plants, and other military, government, and infrastructure facilities in the city to make the entire city a legitimate target. Strategic and long-range bombers are capable of striking without entering the range of the Ukrainian air defense system, and the number of missiles in their salvo is enough to overload the Kiev air defense system. The simultaneous take-off of hundreds of nuclear weapons carriers will impress not only Ukraine, but also the United States, making you think about the impermanence of all things.
Hundreds of explosions around the city in the dark promise an unforgettable sight. The ruins of government and administrative buildings, industrial enterprises, military and infrastructure facilities scattered throughout the center of Kiev, bridges easily visible from the elevated right bank, will long remind the Ukrainian authorities of the fragility of the world in which they live. If you add airports and railway stations (both freight and passenger) to the bridges,the city will also be partially blocked by traffic.
After all, near Kiev, in the Obukhov direction, there is a "Ukrainian Rublevka". Of course, civilians will also die in multimillion-dollar mansions, but it will be Ukrainian deputies and oligarchs, their family members and service personnel — all those who have long demanded the destruction of all Russians and promised to move the war to the streets of Moscow.
Kiev is not alone. There are many cities in Ukraine that can serve a collective purpose. Targets to strike in these cities are not a tank company, they do not move or disguise themselves, and their coordinates are known and constant. Targets for admonishing strikes will last for a long time.
We don't lose anything. Those who consider Russia a cruel aggressor no longer love us, already want to kill us and are already making every effort to do so. Those few who are still waiting for us have long said that it is better to let the cities be wiped out, but Russia will come, than to continue the horror without end.

By demonstrating powerful non-nuclear strikes, Russia will show that it does not need to resort to weapons of mass destruction to bring the Ukrainian authorities to reason. This will weaken the effect of the American propaganda campaign, although the issue of a US nuclear provocation in Ukraine will still remain relevant.
And finally, the citizens of Russia should see that the country is fighting for the sake of victory, and not for fun. The people have long been demanding an answer to Kiev's provocations. It is necessary to satisfy his wishes. After all, the love, trust and support of the people only seem eternal and endless. Sometimes they end. And it happens in one moment. One moment everything was unshakable, and then it became very shaky.
In the end, why could Chechnya, where Russian citizens lived and still live, be leveled to the ground for a good purpose, while Ukraine, where citizens of a hostile state live, waging war against Russia and proud of being on the cusp of another Western campaign to the East, cannot be touched with a finger? It is impossible to raise a banner over the Reichstag without turning Berlin into ruins.

https://ukraina.ru/20221009/1039533342.html

ALAMO wrote:

I would say, it is 9M317, but a/ it is too fast to be photographed with some phone camera b/ there is no way the Ukrs had those.

Ch-58 ?  

Backman wrote:Kaliningrad is Russian territory. If Nato attacks that or gets someone to attack it, Russia will have no choice but go nuclear. It would all be very different if this was the pre nuclear era. But it isn't.

Belarus is maybe a little greyer. Who is going to attack Belarus ? Ukraine ?

These are scare tactics by the US and they are insane.

Firebird wrote:
I would ask for extreme caution here.
Kiev is a jewel. It is a RUSSIAN jewel.
Lvov I would happily turn into a crater.
But never forget that for nearly all of the past 1100 years Kiev was Russian, very Russian.
Britain had an agreement with Hitler on architectural/culturally significant sites not being boned. Modern shit I couldn't give a **** about.

mnztr wrote:Hmm apparently the Ukrainians captured a T90M. Is this a pretty recent mod? Bad news?

LMFS wrote:

Backman wrote:Kaliningrad is Russian territory. If Nato attacks that or gets someone to attack it, Russia will have no choice but go nuclear. It would all be very different if this was the pre nuclear era. But it isn't.

Belarus is maybe a little greyer. Who is going to attack Belarus ? Ukraine ?

These are scare tactics by the US and they are insane.

Insane they are for sure, but if the Anglos manage to get Poland and the Balts involved in an escalation (leading ultimately to war) with Russia on their own (they are barely able to hold themselves as we have seen the last months), then it will not be an all NATO attack but just the action so of those nations alone and Russia will not be legitimated or rather it will not be in their interests to resort to nukes, but to stay conventional. That is exactly what Ishchenko is arguing and that is the calculus of the West to progressively raise the stakes to consume Russia, burning the whole Europe as fuel if necessary. That is why they are demolishing the economy and the governance of the whole continent at full speed, in order to finish the remains of their political independence for good.

owais.usmani wrote:Cruise missiles are good, but they are a rather costly way to take things out. If anything, they should target those cruise missiles so as to completely destroy whatever AD equipment is left in Ukraine.

Then hundreds of Flankers, Fulcrums, Frogfoots and Backfires need to go in and drop thousands and thousands of tons of high explosives in high altitude bombing raids, multiple sorties every day.

This needs to continue until Kiev, Lviv and everything else west of Dnieper turns into scorched earth permanently.

flamming_python wrote:
Russia is not 'barely able to hold themselves'
Unless you think 500 men here or 1000 men there is all they can muster

And comparing what's going on to some Polish and Baltic attack on Kaliningrad is a joke.
Or to a NATO attack on Kaliningrad for that matter.
Will NATO countries introduce mobilization as well for an invasion of Russia? Because Russia is capable of mobilizing over 10 million if given enough time, and has the arms and ammo to equip them.
But this is a fraudulent discussion as it supposes nukes not existing. Whereas in fact they do.

As for the calculus of the West to burn the whole Europe as fuel - well Europe is a perfectly willing partner. Why does this Ishchenko and all these others care so much about Europe's independence?
Russia's concern is but Russia's independence.