Russian special military operation in Ukraine #63

Ukrainian casualties in their Kursk operation have now exceeded 35,000 peole plus equipment losses are approaching 3200 units.

In total, during the fighting in the Kursk direction, the enemy lost more than 35050 military personnel, 215 tanks, 149 infantry fighting vehicles, 120 armored personnel carriers, 1,192 armored combat vehicles, 1,017 vehicles, 300 artillery pieces, 40 multiple rocket launchers, including 11 HIMARS and six MLRS manufactured by the United States, 13 anti-aircraft launchers missile systems, seven transport-loading vehicles, 70 electronic warfare stations, 13 counter-battery radars, four air defense radars, 27 units of engineering and other equipment, of which 13 engineering barrier vehicles, one UR-77 mine clearance unit, as well as six armored recovery vehicles and a command and staff vehicle.

https://function.mil.ru/news_page/country/more.htm?id=12538450@egNews

ALAMO wrote:And one more thing.
There is some discussion up there about 150kg TNT load being "small".
Again, we are dealing with some sort of delusion and lack of principal knowledge of really core military matters.
A 150kg explosive is a load of a typical 500 kg warhead.
9H123F warhead of 9M79 missile carries 162kg of explosives.
Iranian ballistic missiles used against Israel carried a sub200kg warheads, with some 50-70 kg explosives load.

There is some discussion that the payload weight was more like 350-500kg and the speed at impact was more like 3500 m/s

Which basically means the equivalent of well over a ton of TNT, maybe two. Dunno how much exactly.

During Stalin's time he would be shot like a dog for shit like this. Some prison sentence would be in order:

https://t.me/rybar/65638

On the dismissal of Gennady Anashkin

The change of command of the South group, which is now being written about on the Internet, is indeed a consequence of the problems in the Seversky direction.

Belogorovka, Grigorovka, Serebryanka, Zolotarevka, Verkhnekamenskoye, Vyemka - these settlements have already become synonymous with lies and unjustified losses.

Moreover, only the lazy did not write about the problems there: in general, it took the system about two months to react to them properly.

From the point of view of the inertia and sluggishness of the entire military machine, this is truly a fantastic time frame.

What are the feats of the legendary Dvornikovs, Muratovs, Chaiko and other prominent figures worth in the field of senseless military operations that remained without attention for a long time.

I would like to believe that such radical changes will really serve as a reason for improving the entire military system and will lead to the formation of new approaches to both planning and conducting military operations.

War on credit is the most absurd and unjustified use and grinding down that one can imagine. And the non-existent successes of legendary fathers are the disease from which the Russian army cannot be cured.

d_taddei2 wrote:

Well that means Russia can fire one a day without eating into its stock.

What the doctor recommends is a Kalibr a day to keep the orcs at bay

I cannot see them making any less the 3 Kalibers a day, remember they are not only fighting Ukraine but also stockpiling for a possible war with NATO. Its a good point someone made about the glide bombs taking over for Kaliber to large degree, why send 2 Kalibers when you can drop 1 FAB1000 at probably 10% the cost.

billybatts91 wrote:

https://x.com/LeadingReport/status/1860346011857682525

So use Oreshnik with conventional warheads on French ammo dumps

That is not happening, again Russia will not go there.

the risk of Nuclear war is far too great, no matter how much you wish it. They cannot and they know this.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:That is not happening, again Russia will not go there.

the risk of Nuclear war is far too great, no matter how much you wish it. They cannot and they know this.

Yet France is

SeigSoloyvov wrote:That is not happening, again Russia will not go there.

the risk of Nuclear war is far too great, no matter how much you wish it. They cannot and they know this.

Nuclear war won’t happen

Conventional strikes are fine- as I have told you, the west is bluffing

They won’t go nuclear in retaliation to conventional strikes

If NATO thinks it’s fine to hit Russia conventionally the converse is also true

Israel didn’t go nuclear and NATO won’t either

flamming_python wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:That is not happening, again Russia will not go there.

the risk of Nuclear war is far too great, no matter how much you wish it. They cannot and they know this.

Yet France is

The missiles are coming from Ukraine not France directly that is the problem.

I would not bother , if I were Russia , with contemplating conventional war with NATO . No need to spend expensive missiles to deliver  500 kg conventional warhead . This tactic will cost Russia more than NATO . Only a limited number of expensive IRBM , ICBM are needed with nuclear warhead . 5000 nuclear warheads are enough , to deter NATO against war with Russia . I think in reality only a demonstrative atmospheric nuke explosion is enough . Or a strike on empty field or at worst a strike on a ship . Russia can keep the war in Ukraine conventional . No need to change tactics , present tactics are winning . Plus no nuclear contamination over territory soon to be gained . Let the fallout fall in the English Channel . No need to worry about stockpiles either . Keep it clean , keep it nuclear . It is up to NATO to decide if they want to die for Ukraine . The missiles are coming from NATO , fired by NATO . If Russia fired from the Atlantic Ocean , or space , should NATO lash the Sea ! Or destroy the moon ?

SeigSoloyvov wrote:The missiles are coming from Ukraine not France directly that is the problem.

So if Russia was to load a whole bunch of Kalibrs into shipping containers, put them on a cargo ship, and then have it blast the whole payload at Britain and France from international waters then that would be okay then? Or how does it work exactly?

Or just launch them from the English channel, that way the UK and France wouldn't be able to decide who attacked the other!

Oh and, multi-level quotation warning

nomadski wrote:
I would not bother , if I were Russia , with contemplating conventional war with NATO . No need to spend expensive missiles to deliver  500 kg conventional warhead . This tactic will cost Russia more than NATO . Only a limited number of expensive IRBM , ICBM are needed with nuclear warhead . 5000 nuclear warheads are enough , to deter NATO against war with Russia . I think in reality only a demonstrative atmospheric nuke explosion is enough . Or a strike on empty field or at worst a strike on a ship . Russia can keep the war in Ukraine conventional . No need to change tactics , present tactics are winning . Plus no nuclear contamination over territory soon to be gained . Let the fallout fall in the English Channel . No need to worry about stockpiles either . Keep it clean , keep it nuclear . It is up to NATO to decide if they want to die for Ukraine .

Mais, zey are convinced Poutine is bluffing! Il bluffe!

Time for whipping the Sea is over !

flamming_python wrote:So if Russia was to load a whole bunch of Kalibrs into shipping containers, put them on a cargo ship, and then have it blast the whole payload at Britain and France from international waters then that would be okay then? Or how does it work exactly?

Or just launch them from the English channel, that way the UK and France wouldn't be able to decide who attacked the other!

Oh and, multi-level quotation warning

In this scenario is the ship Russian owned? or is it a group of people hostile to Uk and France. Ships btw are considered sovereign territory of their host nation.

This is the problem with your logic, Uk and France etc aren't doing this from their own soil, ukraine is being used.

You guys knew this would happen, you knew full well we would support Ukraine like this. You know the longer you allow this war to carry on, the more it will happen.

You guys opened yourselves up to this, you allowed Ukraine to become what it has, you allowed the coup to go down, you knew before the war started if you attack we will send weapons.

You cannot cry when the consequences of your actions are brought before you, NATO owes you nothing. You are playing a game that has been played for hundreds of years, do not act shocked or surprised when you make bad moves, it goes bad for you and you get punched in the face. This is war not some gentlemanly game of chess,

Much as I criticize Putin for his hand-holding, and his white glove treatment on Ukraine and rightfully so.

In this area he is 100 percent right, the risk of Nuclear war is far to great, it will only take one small spark and once that spark ignites there is no turning back, It will be all to easy for things to go out of control, past the point of no return.

He cannot attack NATO directly and he will never Unless Nato STRIKES from within NATO territory.

Arkanghelsk wrote:

Nuclear war won’t happen

Conventional strikes are fine- as I have told you, the west is bluffing

They won’t go nuclear in retaliation to conventional strikes

If NATO thinks it’s fine to hit Russia conventionally the converse is also true

Israel didn’t go nuclear and NATO won’t either

As I told you, your comparison isn't the same, at all. This isn't Isreal and Iran who do not want to escalate with each other. If iran was serious they would not have called Isreal and warned them allowing a lot of the missiles and drones to get downed before they made it.

Iran had to do something to look tough so they settled for an attack but made the attack pretty ineffective as not to cause a risk of full scale war. If russia hits a NATO country, there will be responses NATO cannot allow Russia to conduct a direct attack and get off easy.

Not to mention since Trump would be in office he will order harsh counter attacks if that happens, he isn't like biden at all. You would know that from his first term if you pay attention

there is tons of logical flaws with your idea, tons of them.

Apples and oranges,

This is a much different beast, a much different situation. With a lot more people involved.

Lmao Putin said the response would come on the territory of countries supplying weapons to Ukraine

Nuclear escalation isn’t a factor here , the weapons are purely conventional

NATO just needs to learn how to take a hit

flamming_python wrote:
So if Russia was to load a whole bunch of Kalibrs into shipping containers, put them on a cargo ship, and then have it blast the whole payload at Britain and France from international waters then that would be okay then? Or how does it work exactly?

Or just launch them from the English channel, that way the UK and France wouldn't be able to decide who attacked the other!

Oh and, multi-level quotation warning

Would be nice to see another 100 Years War going.  Too bad Edward III, and Philip VI aren't around anymore.  Although that would be an interesting idea, hire out Italians (mafia or some of the illegals the EU has made them accept into their country) and pay them to do it with Euros, Pounds, or Dollars.  

Americunts and Eurotrash:  We know the Russians launched these weapons at us
Putin: What are you idiots smoking, we do not have any naval presence in the English Channel and those ships are owned by European firms

nomadski wrote:


Time for whipping the Sea is over !

what in the name of Ahura Mazda?

Arkanghelsk wrote:Lmao Putin said the response would come on the territory of countries supplying weapons to Ukraine

Nuclear escalation isn’t a factor here , the weapons are purely conventional

NATO just needs to learn how to take a hit  

Dude....I have said multiple times it will start with convential weapons but over time, tension will build, we will keep bombing eachother until it hits that snapping point.

You are ignoring what i have said, i never said the first attack would lead to nukes

I said EVENTUALLY.

As for what Putin says, and? the guy has said red line this, red line that, blahblahblah.

He has said this kind of stuff multiple times and he has done nothing, Idk why you are acting like this isn't the same song and dance as before.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

As I told you, your comparison isn't the same, at all. This isn't Isreal and Iran who do not want to escalate with eachother. If iran was serious they would not have called Isreal and warned them allowing a lot of the missiles and drones to get downed before they made it.

there is tons of logical flaws with your idea, tons of them.

Apples and oranges,

This is a much different beast, a much different situation. With a lot more people involved.

Only in your mind is it different

And it’s not flawed at all, that a non nuclear state attacked a nuclear one and faced little retaliation let alone a nuclear one says all you need to know about NATOs empty bluster

If they hit Russia again, the response will be conventional on the territory of NATO states

They just have to deal with it like Israel did

They aren’t going nuclear for a conventional blow, they’ll just have to find a way to strike Russia back conventionally

Although with dwindling missile stocks and lack of air defenses the exchange rate is not in NATOs favor

I think they will back down just like Israel did

I have already responded to this in another comment, again no.

You assume it will end at one strike, it will not. It will cause a chain effect that will go on and on until something triggers those nukes.

We will agree to disagree here and leave it at that

SeigSoloyvov wrote:In this scenario is the ship Russian owned? or is it a group of people hostile to Uk and France. Ships btw are considered sovereign territory of their host nation.

This is the problem with your logic, Uk and France etc aren't doing this from their own soil, ukraine is being used.

You guys knew this would happen, you knew full well we would support Ukraine like this. You know the longer you allow this war to carry on, the more it will happen.

You guys opened yourselves up to this, you allowed Ukraine to become what it has, you allowed the coup to go down, you knew before the war started if you attack we will send weapons.

You cannot cry when the consequences of your actions are brought before you, NATO owes you nothing. You are playing a game that has been played for hundreds of years, do not act shocked or surprised when you make bad moves, it goes bad for you and you get punched in the face. This is war not some gentlemanly game of chess,

Much as I criticize Putin for his hand-holding, and his white glove treatment on Ukraine and rightfully so.

In this area he is 100 percent right, the risk of Nuclear war is far to great, it will only take one small spark and once that spark ignites there is no turning back, It will be all to easy for things to go out of control, past the point of no return.

He cannot attack NATO directly and he will never Unless Nato STRIKES from within NATO territory.

I believe Putin was quite clear in his latest statement as to what he would do. While leaving himself the option open of not doing it. But he will. Because it's being done to Russia, no matter what obfuscations or made up 'rules of the game' are used to justify it. What you're saying sounds rather like the rules-based international order to me. We're the ones who set the rules of the game and the boundaries of play, not you. But when we need to we can bend or break our own rules as well, while holding everyone else accountable to them. We can go back on our own promises, change our minds at any time, or throw the chessboard up in our opponents faces when we don't like how the game according to all these rules we earlier decided upon is now going. As evidently we don't in the Ukraine.

But this is no game I'm afraid, not to Russia. This is an act of war and it doesn't matter from who's territory its being done, what matters is the act itself and who is doing it. NATO leaders will repeat it at their peril. You want to play famous last words be my guest.

caveat emptor wrote:During Stalin's time he would be shot like a dog for shit like this. Some prison sentence would be in order:

https://t.me/rybar/65638

On the dismissal of Gennady Anashkin

The change of command of the South group, which is now being written about on the Internet, is indeed a consequence of the problems in the Seversky direction.

Belogorovka, Grigorovka, Serebryanka, Zolotarevka, Verkhnekamenskoye, Vyemka - these settlements have already become synonymous with lies and unjustified losses.

Moreover, only the lazy did not write about the problems there: in general, it took the system about two months to react to them properly.

From the point of view of the inertia and sluggishness of the entire military machine, this is truly a fantastic time frame.

What are the feats of the legendary Dvornikovs, Muratovs, Chaiko and other prominent figures worth in the field of senseless military operations that remained without attention for a long time.

I would like to believe that such radical changes will really serve as a reason for improving the entire military system and will lead to the formation of new approaches to both planning and conducting military operations.

War on credit is the most absurd and unjustified use and grinding down that one can imagine. And the non-existent successes of legendary fathers are the disease from which the Russian army cannot be cured.

You forgot Putin and Zusko:

https://asaland.proboards.com/thread/523/russian-general-ukrainian-banderowiec-generalem