EPTRusso-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 366
| Forum Index > General Forum |
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States43985 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
On January 30 2023 01:57 KwarK wrote: Bosporus is closed to combatants, how are you going to get it to a Ukrainian port. Closed by a Nato "ally". Who would probably not mind a less of a Russian presence. Given the centuries of history between the two nations. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18291 Posts
On January 30 2023 02:04 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Closed by a Nato "ally". Who would probably not mind a less of a Russian presence. Given the centuries of history between the two nations. Eh, Turkey is a NATO "ally", but in this war is definitely deliberately trying to maintain some semblance of neutrality. Letting NATO combat ships through the Bosporus would break the Montreux treaty that gives Turkey the right to close the Bosporus, meaning Russia would see it as a direct act of war by NATO members against them. It seems like an insane escalation. Also, one submarine alone isn't going to win the naval battle against the entire black sea fleet, even if it's apparently a far less powerful fleet than anyone imagined a year ago. | ||
|
Ardias
Russian Federation618 Posts
On January 30 2023 02:04 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Closed by a Nato "ally". Who would probably not mind a less of a Russian presence. Given the centuries of history between the two nations. Centuries of history do not matter in this case, ordinary Turk has much more beef with Greeks, Kurds and Armenians, than with Russians. The largest percentage (probably won't say "majority", but a large part) of tourists in Turkey are Russians. And if we talk about the will of the rulers, while Erdogan is in power, he will do most to prolong this conflict. He wants to build his own empire/alliance of Turkic countries and peoples, Azerbaijan is already pretty much Turkish sattelite and he is expanding influence in Central Asia and to Russian Tatar population. He probably wouldn't want US to have too eager to look after him. If they are busy in Ukraine, they won't. So he doesn't get much from Ukrainian victory, but he won't take Russian side either, since it's bad PR in the West, and he want to reap benefits as mediator. Turkey now is pretty much controlling the grain supplies from both Ukraine and Russia, Turkey is a negotiaton ground between representatives of both countries, and most likely - one of the ways of gray imports into Russia in evadion of sanctions, on which it gets profits of being middleman. Plus after tourism ban in Europe the number of Russian tourist to Turkey should have increased (though need to look for data to confirm it). | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
On January 30 2023 03:56 Ardias wrote: Centuries of history do not matter in this case, ordinary Turk has much more beef with Greeks, Kurds and Armenians, than with Russians. The largest percentage (probably won't say "majority", but a large part) of tourists in Turkey are Russians. And if we talk about the will of the rulers, while Erdogan is in power, he will do most to prolong this conflict. He wants to build his own empire/alliance of Turkic countries and peoples, Azerbaijan is already pretty much Turkish sattelite and he is expanding influence in Central Asia and to Russian Tatar population. He probably wouldn't want US to have too eager to look after him. If they are busy in Ukraine, they won't. So he doesn't get much from Ukrainian victory, but he won't take Russian side either, since it's bad PR in the West, and he want to reap benefits as mediator. Turkey now is pretty much controlling the grain supplies from both Ukraine and Russia, Turkey is a negotiaton ground between representatives of both countries, and most likely - one of the ways of gray imports into Russia in evadion of sanctions, on which it gets profits of being middleman. Plus after tourism ban in Europe the number of Russian tourist to Turkey should have increased (though need to look for data to confirm it). Hence why I used "Ally" lol Hell Greece and Turkey almost went to war in the mid 90's. Almost 45 mins away according to some diplomats. | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6223 Posts
On January 30 2023 01:29 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Sure as shit won't happen. Never mind the fact that training for such a transfer would take YEARS, but also psychological training etc. The shitstorm that would erupt once known would not be worth it. There is a reason Russia, US, France, China etc have never sold Submarines to certain countries that can't guarantee transfers etc. https://twitter.com/MelnykAndrij/status/1619386522868006912 That makes no sense. In late May 2022, Denmark sent Harpoon launchers and missiles to Ukraine to help their war effort, and shortly after, the Netherlands sent additional missiles.[55][56][57] In mid-June 2022, the US announced that they would supply Ukraine with Harpoon launchers and missiles,[57][58] and the UK Defence Secretary said that they also were looking into supplying Ukraine with the missiles.[56] On 17 June, Ukraine claimed to have sunk the tugboat Spasatel Vasily Bekh with two Harpoon missiles. In a tweet they said "Spasatel Vasily Bekh, a tug of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, successfully demilitarized by the @UA_NAVY. The ship was transporting personnel, weapons and ammunition to the occupied Snake Island."[59] Ukraine's Naval Command said the Russian tugboat had a Tor missile system on board. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harpoon_(missile)#Harpoon_Block_II _ER Just pass them more Harpoons, or figure out how to rig them up to Mig-29s like they did the HARMs. It avoids all the mess of trying to get a boat into the Black Sea. | ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2784 Posts
Rocket artillery was not tanks. Tanks were not aircraft. F16 are not... submarines? | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
On January 30 2023 05:47 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: When 155 mm arrived at least it was not HIMARS. Rocket artillery was not tanks. Tanks were not aircraft. F16 are not... submarines? One of those is not like the others. Besides Ukraine does not have a Submarine force. What needs to happen to become a Submariner: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Enlisted_Submarine_School Not counting the training for officers which can be as long as two years. 9 months for standard training. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
| ||
|
warding
Portugal2395 Posts
On January 30 2023 07:11 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: One of those is not like the others. Besides Ukraine does not have a Submarine force. What needs to happen to become a Submariner: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Enlisted_Submarine_School Not counting the training for officers which can be as long as two years. 9 months for standard training. I think the point is that this might be a tactic to make the next step - in this case, sending in F-16s - seem not so escalatory. You have to redraw the red line somewhere after you cross it. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
He also reiterates fears of escalation. Basically he thinks the horses must be held. Whether or not he's telling us the truth about his motive I can't tell. https://www.n-tv.de/politik/Scholz-fuerchtet-Uberbietungswettbewerb-bei-Waffensystemen-article23877444.html | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
On January 30 2023 08:18 Magic Powers wrote: Scholz, regarding calls for fighter jets, says the question doesn't even warrant consideration. He's apparently worried about the matter of integrity/professionalism if - after the decision to send the tanks - the "next debate begins immediately". He also reiterates fears of escalation. Basically he thinks the horses must be held. Whether or not he's telling us the truth about his motive I can't tell. https://www.n-tv.de/politik/Scholz-fuerchtet-Uberbietungswettbewerb-bei-Waffensystemen-article23877444.html Perhaps, and I am doubtful to this tbh, he means domestic planes. Because from there is no way Germany will sell the Tornado models to anybody. Cause they have to carry/fire the Nukes if/when it comes to that. | ||
|
gobbledydook
Australia2605 Posts
On January 30 2023 07:42 Magic Powers wrote: I don't know about others, but my estimate is that this war will take at least three more years before Ukraine can consider declaring any sort of victory, and that's the absolute best scenario. Since Ukraine is fighting all by itself, it's more likely that it'll take five or more years. It makes perfect sense to start training them on submarines even if that takes several years to complete. Would Turkey even allow the submarines to pass the Bosphorus? | ||
zatic
Zurich15365 Posts
| ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On January 30 2023 10:17 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Perhaps, and I am doubtful to this tbh, he means domestic planes. Because from there is no way Germany will sell the Tornado models to anybody. Cause they have to carry/fire the Nukes if/when it comes to that. Looks like everything Scholz says can be explained with him being really bad at communication. No shade on you, I know you're playing devil's advocate. I may not look it but I appreciate the effort. My view is that Scholz has his pants full and he falsely believes driving at old man speed for any and every reason equates to being cautious and alert. He's the embodiment of scared money, which allows ballsy players like Putin to bluff him over and over again, to use a poker metaphor. Zelensky is the opposite, he calls every single bluff. Hence the polar opposition between him and Scholz. I guess for Germany that worked out really well just until prior to the war. Now Scholz is more like a misplaced tool. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On January 30 2023 10:46 gobbledydook wrote: Would Turkey even allow the submarines to pass the Bosphorus? Tbh I don't know much about modern Turkey politics besides their troubled history with various coups, so I have absolutely no clue. But I subscribe to the idea of overshooting the target when it comes to important matters like this war. Always aim as high as is possible and never settle for less than what you can get. That's why I think Ukrainians should be trained years in advance for all kinds of tasks and equipments. I also think facilities should be built in Ukraine asap for large scale production of weapons and ammunition. Better to win the war and have a large excess of underutilized weapons and soldiers than to lose the war and lament the failings of a late and small effort. Zelensky, since the start of the war, has been doing a great job communicating Ukraine's needs for weapons, he's not holding back. He sometimes overshoots his demands (realistically speaking) and that's how he gets people off their asses to provide more. I wish there were more politicians like him in allied nations making those same demands in his name, because we already have more than enough pragmatists to keep things grounded, which is certainly appreciated when it's done right (like providing information about actual practical use of various equipment). | ||
|
Artesimo
Germany573 Posts
On January 30 2023 18:00 Magic Powers wrote: Looks like everything Scholz says can be explained with him being really bad at communication. No shade on you, I know you're playing devil's advocate. I may not look it but I appreciate the effort. My view is that Scholz has his pants full and he falsely believes driving at old man speed for any and every reason equates to being cautious and alert. He's the embodiment of scared money, which allows ballsy players like Putin to bluff him over and over again, to use a poker metaphor. Zelensky is the opposite, he calls every single bluff. Hence the polar opposition between him and Scholz. I guess for Germany that worked out really well just until prior to the war. Now Scholz is more like a misplaced tool. Last time I checked his slow approach forced the US, ukraines only supporter that can realistically continuously supply them with enough tanks, to send some. So it seems clearly not as black and white as you try to make it out. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11835 Posts
On January 30 2023 19:09 Artesimo wrote: Last time I checked his slow approach forced the US, ukraines only supporter that can realistically continuously supply them with enough tanks, to send some. So it seems clearly not as black and white as you try to make it out. No, no, you cannot do that. We had almost a week of not talking about how Germany is the worst thing ever. We need a new reason to do that now. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On January 30 2023 19:09 Artesimo wrote: Last time I checked his slow approach forced the US, ukraines only supporter that can realistically continuously supply them with enough tanks, to send some. So it seems clearly not as black and white as you try to make it out. Please provide a shred of evidence that Scholz's obstructiveness and indecision played even the slightest part in other nations providing Leopard 2s or other battle tanks. | ||
| ||
