EPTThe HIMARS replacement for Cluster Munitions isn't explosives but clusters of tungsten ball delivered by rockets covering half a square mile.
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 488
| 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. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14220 Posts
The HIMARS replacement for Cluster Munitions isn't explosives but clusters of tungsten ball delivered by rockets covering half a square mile. | ||
|
Artesimo
Germany628 Posts
On July 07 2023 05:03 Sermokala wrote: There is a question of if they will be used as cluster bombs or if they are intended to be broken apart and delivered via drones. Obivously cluster bombs are morally bad for their failure rate but if they are delivered right on target it can be argued to have a much easier time to clean up. Drone sized munitions isn't something mass produced, Anti tank grenades haven't been a thing for a long time and conventional grenades are small for what the common drone can deliver. The HIMARS replacement for Cluster Munitions isn't explosives but clusters of tungsten ball delivered by rockets covering half a square mile. If ukraine receives cluster ammunition they can fire then I guarantee it will be fired as just that unless they are bound by some other agreement. Ukraine hasn't signed the convention to not use cluster ammunition, and thus are free to use it as they have done in the past. The story of ukraine wanting to disassemble the cluster ammunition to use its submunition for drones seems like an obvious PR move to limit damage to public support. | ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2914 Posts
But lets not be to dramatic here. First of all if the goal is to use them to get rid of the main trenchlines you can use them in a predetermined area. This area is going to need heavy demining already (reports of AT mines every 1,5 m...). Also consider that regular shells fail too. Not close to the same rate but you need a lot more regular shells for trenches so the amount of UXO will be prohibitive either way in these areas. Also killed Ukrainian solidiers count and very heavy shelling with more effective weapons will reduce this. Finally every day the war goes on kills people and poisons the soil with UXO. Overwhelming firepower at this stage and the ability to conserve regular shells untill the production ramp up really kicks have a huge potential to shorten the war. | ||
|
captainwaffles
United States1050 Posts
On July 06 2023 07:45 ZeroByte13 wrote: There's almost no activity in this topic in the last week or so. I'm distracted by more urgent personal matters now so I don't follow current events much - were there no news / changes / advancements during last 5-7 days? Update on the conflict in Ukraine for July 3, 2023: - Ukraine’s offensive reaches the 1 month mark and has made relatively little progress beyond the security zones ahead of Russia’s main defenses; - This is mainly owed to Russian mine fields and Ukraine’s inability to clear them while under fire; - Ukraine’s artillery shell supply is limited, the longer the offensive takes, the less ammunition Ukraine will have to support and exploit any breakthroughs that do occur; - Mounting Ukrainian losses mean that any achievements made during the offensive will be difficult to consolidate no matter where on the map the offensive ends; - Unable to breach Russian defenses, Ukraine and its NATO sponsors appear to be exploring “alternative” options to change battlefield dynamics including continued attempts to accuse Russia of planning to destroy the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant; | ||
KwarK
United States44449 Posts
The counteroffensive is proceeding according to plan. Ukraine does not mass all its units in one place and charge across a minefield because without air and artillery dominance that would be a very bad idea. It engages in sustained low intensity exchanges across the entire front to create decentralized dispersed attrition. It is achieving its aims in that regard and we have seen no shortage of evidence that Russia is suffering from that attrition. From shells fired per day to the empty Soviet stocks to the 50 year old tanks on the front it is clear that Russia cannot sustain these losses. | ||
|
ZeroByte13
801 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22705 Posts
On July 07 2023 17:57 captainwaffles wrote: And that is where you completely lose me and everything else you typed becomes incredibly suspect simply by association.- Unable to breach Russian defenses, Ukraine and its NATO sponsors appear to be exploring “alternative” options to change battlefield dynamics including continued attempts to accuse Russia of planning to destroy the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant; The notion that the West is pretending like Russia might destroy a nuclear power plant to "change battlefield dynamics" makes no sense. | ||
|
captainwaffles
United States1050 Posts
This is my first post on these forums in 5 years, I was feeling nostalgic and saw this thread and figured it could use a fresh perspective. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On July 07 2023 18:32 captainwaffles wrote: I'm unapologetically pro Russia, so I'm just going to cut the BS and say I think the West is lying about virtually everything. I think anyone who knows the full history that led up to the Special Military Operation shares this sentiment. This is my first post on these forums in 5 years, I was feeling nostalgic and saw this thread and figured it could use a fresh perspective. Well, thanks for giving us a brief glimpse into how brainwashed exactly some people, like you, are. | ||
|
schaf
Germany1326 Posts
On July 07 2023 18:32 captainwaffles wrote: I think the West is lying about virtually everything. Well if you start with that then there is no other outcome. The question being how one arrives at this and how one earth Russia is more trustworthy. | ||
|
captainwaffles
United States1050 Posts
On July 07 2023 18:54 Magic Powers wrote: Well, thanks for giving us a brief glimpse into how brainwashed exactly some people, like you, are. I mean, is it at all surprising that people who support Russia think the Western media and governments are lying about everything? From our point of view, people supporting NATO's incursion into Ukraine since the middle of the last century are the brainwashed ones. The CIA has been in Ukraine since the end of WWII, nurturing and building up this Banderite movement for the purpose of weaponizing Ukraine against Russia. It's the same thing the West does everywhere else on earth, whether it's Taiwan or Hong Kong against China, or Israel and the gulf states against Iran. Frankly, if the West could respect and learn to live with a Sovereign Russia (and Eurasia for that matter), this entire conflict would have been avoided. 350k Ukrainians are dead and for what? So they can take back the Donbas that they've been shellling and bombing since 2014? Just ask yourself this: If those ethnically Russian people in the Donbas voted to join Russia, why is there an issue at all? Kiev, since 2014, clearly wasn't happy with those people. You can say people like me, Brian Berletic, Dougals MacGregor, Scott Ritter, Mark Sleboda etc. are all brainwashed, but it doesn't actually change anything in the real world, it just signals to others that the things people like us say shouldn't be listened too or heard out. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany12086 Posts
The Ukrainians who died died because Russia invaded it neighbour, not once, not twice, but three times in the last decade. (Crimea, Donbass, and finally to completely take them out). You can not blame anyone but Russia for this, because no one but Russia invaded another country. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8281 Posts
On July 07 2023 18:32 captainwaffles wrote: I think the West is lying about virtually everything. What about Russia? Do you think they are a trustworthy source? On July 07 2023 20:43 captainwaffles wrote: Just ask yourself this: If those ethnically Russian people in the Donbas voted to join Russia, why is there an issue at all? You know this perfectly well, and pretending you don't is just arguing in bad faith. You can't just invade another country, hold a referendum, and claim "See? The people who lives here wants to be with us!". Ignoring the multitude of ways such a referendum would be faked, it doesn't matter. Invading a country with mass immigration and then claiming the land as your own isn't a valid way to conduct politics in the 2020s. Would you be happy if Mexico sent millions of people into Texas, held a referendum, and then claimed "Actually, this land is ours now"? | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22705 Posts
Still makes just as little sense as the last time. | ||
|
Lwerewolf
Bulgaria78 Posts
Wanna start bets on how long it'll be until more goodwill starts pouring out of a certain invincible, righteous and always successful side?  | ||
|
schaf
Germany1326 Posts
On July 07 2023 21:20 Lwerewolf wrote: I really like the "sources" provided. Wanna start bets on how long it'll be until more goodwill starts pouring out of a certain invincible, righteous and always successful side? Yeah I'm not sure what in the world this site is... First article I clicked on But the article cited is just typical cold war stuff. CIA goes to Soviet country to distribute anti-Soviet literature. Really shocking stuff! | ||
|
ZeroByte13
801 Posts
I have an impression that many here became a bit more reserved and cautious in their predictions. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On July 07 2023 21:40 ZeroByte13 wrote: But what is the consensus or overall feeling here - how successful the counter-offensive probably will be and what you'd expect to change in next, say, 2 months? I have an impression that many here became a bit more reserved and cautious in their predictions. The war will likely take years. For Crimea it'll take even longer. Five to ten years for the whole war is a realistic possibility, because Russia just has so much in reserve and Ukraine will most likely not invade Russia to end the war sooner. This is in my view the main issue holding them back. | ||
2Pacalypse-
Croatia9571 Posts
On July 07 2023 21:40 ZeroByte13 wrote: But what is the consensus or overall feeling here - how successful the counter-offensive probably will be and what you'd expect to change in next, say, 2 months? I have an impression that many here became a bit more reserved and cautious in their predictions. Nobody knows yet. I'm cautiously optimistic. Ukraine is doing all the right things with the resources they have to facilitate a breakthrough. Will a breakthrough happen? Hard to say until it does. One thing is clear; Russia had more than 10 months to prepare their defense lines in Zaporizhzhia and they're not running this time, so this situation will not be anything like the Kharkiv counter-offensive. And Kherson counter-offensive had some unique geographical features so it won't be like that either. We're in a completely new territory, the current counter-offensive is covering huge swathes of land and each direction has its own challenges. Predicting 2 months in advance is pretty much impossible at this point, but personally I'm a bit more reserved in my predictions. If we put "breaking the Russia's land-bridge to Crimea" as the ultimate goal of this Summer counter-offensive, then I don't expect for that to happen until this Autumn without some unexpected things happening (e.g. Prigozhin's thunder run to Moscow pt. 2). | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
| ||
| ||
