USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait with s

[Abbazorkzog]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

The US' image is damaged irreparably. Nobody starting threads like this is going to be taken seriously.

Particularly with Trump as president.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

For Westphalian....

Россия останется без ракет? | Эпоха ядерного паритета РФ и США, похоже, стремительно уходит в прошлое (Russian language)

 

[beerftw]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

Yes, they would be grim. But MAD also rests of a concept that nuclear weapons are usable in some circumstances.


For example, using tactical nukes against US armored divisions moving into western Russia. Moscow would do that (it's in our defence policy). Your people would die and you'd withdraw because if Russia is prepared to use nukes on its own territory it sure as heck would do so against the US if needed.

Americans would understand this. They don't want to die, and they know you couldn't even control Iraq after invading it.

Generally russia would not use nukes on formations moving into russia unless the demise of their state was imminent, and instead first try conventional warfare. The russians will however use nuclear weapons if they are in fear of losing on their home turf, as would america and france as well.

 

[beerftw]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

I don't need lessons in nuclear theory or practise from someone who lives in a satellite state of the US.


Yes, only the US has ever been barbaric enough to use them, but the consequences are unpredictable.

But RV's nonchalant supposition that Russia would rather surrender than use nuclear weapons is not just illiterate and delusional, but positively dangerous.

I think you just might need lessons on it, for example things like tactical nukes are still nukes, as are micro nukes which at one time america and the soviet union sought after thinking it would bypass mad, well they found out it was pointless as mad would still be in use.

As time went on it was realized by most of the world nuclear war is an unwinnable game that some bigwigs in both countries govts still thought could be won. But if you live in russia you might get to see on the news the friendly reminder of where your local fallout shelter is located, something no one else does now a days, which indicates russia is both prepared for nuclear war and also Afraid of nuclear war.

 

[Westphalian]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

For Westphalian....

Россия останется без ракет? | Эпоха ядерного паритета РФ и США, похоже, стремительно уходит в прошлое (Russian language)

I think this article is fair enough. It makes some good points, and it's not for me to pretend that Russia does not have problems.

But I think it makes some very questionable statements too.


For example, it dismisses Russia's submarine leg of its nuclear triad on the basis that the Americans will know where those nuclear subs are and will disable them before launch. This is extremely questionable if not positively reckless. I think it reflects the arrogance that infects some of your posts. The 955s and 667s do not hang about in waters easily accessible to US subs and far from the cover of supporting Russian attack subs and naval surface vessels. In fact, quite the reverse. If the author thinks they are vulnerable then he's a hopeless optimist.

The author also rather bizarrely dismisses the RS-24 on the basis that it's only a single warhead missile. What's the odd 800kt blast yield over New York City ..... who cares right? Trivia.

I mean, it's fair to point out Russia's problems, but it makes no mention of US problems ...... Minutemen are ageing, their reliability is questionable, the US lacks resolve, its people are dis-united and weak, and let's face it, they have no appetite for a possible thermo-nuclear war.

We know our problems, and challenges. The article is good for this. But it stops there.

 

[Westphalian]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

Generally russia would not use nukes on formations moving into russia unless the demise of their state was imminent, and instead first try conventional warfare. The russians will however use nuclear weapons if they are in fear of losing on their home turf, as would america and france as well.

Given Moscow's geographic location and that of the bulk of the population, formations moving into western Russia are by definition a threat to the survival of the state.


Don't kid yourself. An invasion of Russia would be stopped very quickly by whatever means necessary. If that meant the use of nuclear weapons, then it would happen. If that meant a selective nuclear strike on an American facilities somewhere (like say Puerto Rico), just to remind our friends of our intent and the consequences of their aggression - then so be it.

Fortunately nobody is stupid enough to invade Russia, and your European friends aren't even going to facilitate such a build up because they certainly don't want Europe reduced to rubble.

 

[Chagos]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

~.....................If that meant a selective nuclear strike on an American facilities somewhere (like say Puerto Rico), just to remind our friends of our intent and the consequences of their aggression - then so be it. ..............................~

If the Kremlin were indeed prone to share into such lunacy as you are advocating here, you and others like you better get to Novosibirsk pretty fast, and hope that's going to be far enough away.

Because if you guys take a presumably local conflict (in this totally fantasized scenario) international, you'd be stark raving mad to think that anybody's consequences would then end.

 

[Westphalian]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

The scenario we are duscussing is the invasion of Russia.

Yes, a lunatic idea, and one in which Moscow would escalate rapidly until the US stopped its lunacy.

No stste in the world would wave a white flag if it could destroy, or threaten to destroy, the enemy.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

Fortunately nobody is stupid enough to invade Russia.

Nobody would want Russia. A ****hole.

But removing Russia from occupying other nations is a different matter.

 

[Westphalian]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

Nobody would want Russia. A ****hole.

But removing Russia from occupying other nations is a different matter.

Crimea is Russia.

 

[Chagos]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

Crimea is Russia.

Yeah, like Sudetenland was Germany.:roll:

 

[Westphalian]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

Yeah, like Sudetenland was Germany.:roll:

What's your point?


Crimea is a distinct and current historical situation. Referencing to the catastrophic events of 80 years ago has no relevance.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

What's your point?

 

[Chagos]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

What's your point?

You know darn well what my point is.

Crimea is a distinct and current historical situation. Referencing to the catastrophic events of 80 years ago has no relevance.

Well, they were a distinct historical situation as well and very current in their time. None of which made any of it right.

Land theft is land theft and invasion is invasion.

 

[beerftw]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

Given Moscow's geographic location and that of the bulk of the population, formations moving into western Russia are by definition a threat to the survival of the state.


Don't kid yourself. An invasion of Russia would be stopped very quickly by whatever means necessary. If that meant the use of nuclear weapons, then it would happen. If that meant a selective nuclear strike on an American facilities somewhere (like say Puerto Rico), just to remind our friends of our intent and the consequences of their aggression - then so be it.

Fortunately nobody is stupid enough to invade Russia, and your European friends aren't even going to facilitate such a build up because they certainly don't want Europe reduced to rubble.

Russia will not do selective nuclear strikes against america, if they ever used them it would be against soldier formations in an already all out nuclear war. The idea that russia will just use nukes ahead of time is like the thought russia would all out invade europe, the answer is yes they would however just like the all out invasion the nukes would be used if nuclear war was imminent or their demise was imminent.

To put it simply you never use your last resort at the beginning, russia is smart enough not to do that, while you think they would.

 

[Westphalian]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

Russia will not do selective nuclear strikes against america, if they ever used them it would be against soldier formations in an already all out nuclear war. The idea that russia will just use nukes ahead of time is like the thought russia would all out invade europe, the answer is yes they would however just like the all out invasion the nukes would be used if nuclear war was imminent or their demise was imminent.

To put it simply you never use your last resort at the beginning, russia is smart enough not to do that, while you think they would.

Nuclear doctrine, and you can see this very clearly in the latest US Defence Posture, is evolving towards a more selective and escalatory approach to nuclear weapons.


As I've repeatedly said, any invasion of Russia from the west would, by definition, be existential given Russia's geography. Only the US would ever be capable of doing this, and it would need a massive force build up in Europe is preparation. Thus I'm talking about the end of a very long road, not the beginning.

The battlefield use of tactical nuclear weapons is old stuff, and certainly likely in that situation, which I think you agree with.

What I don't agree with is RV's totally inane analysis that nuclear weapons would never be used due to Russia's assured destruction, and that therefore Russia would be forced to surrender in a conflict with the US which he seems to believe could safely be kept conventional. That analysis is just plain stupid, and shows no grasp of escalation dominance under MAD which would actually put far more pressure on the US to desist from its own aggression than it would put on Russia to stop defending itself.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

Nuclear weapons is Russia's foremost intimidation card.

Their air/land/sea military cannot compete with Western counterparts.

 

[Westphalian]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

Nuclear weapons is Russia's foremost intimidation card.

Their air/land/sea military cannot compete with Western counterparts.

Western counterparts - If you mean the US then I agree. If not then you're wrong.

But I don't know what you mean in general. Nuclear weapons have played no part in any alleged Russian intimidation that I know of - Ukraine, Georgia, Syria .......

No. Nuclear weapons matter only as a last resort guarantor of sovereignty and independence. That's why Russia can resist the US. That's also, in a nutshell, why you liberals hate Russia. It hasn't joined the empire. It hasn't taken its place allotted to it by the western liberal elite post 1991.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

But I don't know what you mean in general. Nuclear weapons have played no part in any alleged Russian intimidation that I know of....

Russia threatens Armageddon every week.....

Russia's 'invulnerable' nuclear missile ready to deploy, Putin says

 

[Chagos]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

~........................But I don't know what you mean in general. Nuclear weapons have played no part in any alleged Russian intimidation that I know of - Ukraine, Georgia, Syria .....................~

So your most recent lunatic fantasy of Russia striking Puerto Rico with nukes arose just under your own steam?

Well, that's good to know.:roll:

 

[Westphalian]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

So your most recent lunatic fantasy of Russia striking Puerto Rico with nukes arose just under your own steam?

Well, that's good to know.:roll:

That possibility was in response to the primary act of fantasy aggression suggested by some of your colleagues - an invasion of Russia.

Pity that didn't trigger your lunatic alert mechanism ............. are you a war-monger ?

 

[Chagos]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

That possibility was in response to the primary act of fantasy aggression suggested by some of your colleagues - an invasion of Russia.

Pity that didn't trigger your lunatic alert mechanism ............. are you a war-monger ?

The whole thing is really as daft as if I suggested that a Russian invasion of the Baltics would trigger the nuking of Moscow.

Let's be clear here on who is actually fantasizing about nuclear strikes, eh Godpodin?

 

[beerftw]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

Nuclear doctrine, and you can see this very clearly in the latest US Defence Posture, is evolving towards a more selective and escalatory approach to nuclear weapons.


As I've repeatedly said, any invasion of Russia from the west would, by definition, be existential given Russia's geography. Only the US would ever be capable of doing this, and it would need a massive force build up in Europe is preparation. Thus I'm talking about the end of a very long road, not the beginning.

The battlefield use of tactical nuclear weapons is old stuff, and certainly likely in that situation, which I think you agree with.

What I don't agree with is RV's totally inane analysis that nuclear weapons would never be used due to Russia's assured destruction, and that therefore Russia would be forced to surrender in a conflict with the US which he seems to believe could safely be kept conventional. That analysis is just plain stupid, and shows no grasp of escalation dominance under MAD which would actually put far more pressure on the US to desist from its own aggression than it would put on Russia to stop defending itself.

An invasion of russia by the west would not be an existential threat unless the invasion was full out done by nato and america, and truthfully given the odds of history, both would lose trying to take russia anyways. Russia is an empire ender, one of the most difficult nations in the worlds history to invade or hold, and their terrain and climate made 2 empires who were among the most powerful in history collapse just for trying to invade. Russia can handle quite a bit before they need to resort to nukes, and truthfully anyone that determined to take russia would have to resort to nukes first if they want a fighting chance, which takes away the russians need to nuke first in any invasion, odds are any invader will progress to a certain point then collapse and be horribly defeated or they will use nukes from the start, and if someone tries to take russia through the winter after they retreat to siberia, that someone must be the worst historian alive.

 

[Westphalian]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

An invasion of russia by the west would not be an existential threat unless the invasion was full out done by nato and america, and truthfully given the odds of history, both would lose trying to take russia anyways. Russia is an empire ender, one of the most difficult nations in the worlds history to invade or hold, and their terrain and climate made 2 empires who were among the most powerful in history collapse just for trying to invade. Russia can handle quite a bit before they need to resort to nukes, and truthfully anyone that determined to take russia would have to resort to nukes first if they want a fighting chance, which takes away the russians need to nuke first in any invasion, odds are any invader will progress to a certain point then collapse and be horribly defeated or they will use nukes from the start, and if someone tries to take russia through the winter after they retreat to siberia, that someone must be the worst historian alive.

Obviously we're talking about the US here. No other party is capable or mad enough.


In practice of course the US would need a phenomenal build up of heavy artillery, tanks, troops and air assets to be concentrated in Europe over a period of months. The purpose of this could not be hidden, and of course it's unlikely that any European state (other than the UK, Poland, and stupid little places like Lithuania) would be mad enough to be the hosting ground and first target for a war that would destroy them.

So it's all a moot point in that sense. But let's assume that Europe sits happily by and facilitates a US build up, Clinton (or a fellow hater) is President, Russia does nothing, the US invades along a couple of fronts and successfully advances on Moscow with no losses (think Nigeria with snow) - the end result is the use of nuclear weapons by Russia against US targets. Americans die. How many do you want? (Not a question for you Beerftw because your analysis is much nearer the mark, but it's one for our reckless haters who think the US can run over Russia or force its grovelling surrender).

 

[MrShangles]

Re: USA and our allies need to rapidly counter "Russia"’s military aggression in the Kerch Strait wi

Oh, you have allies still?

When someone needs our help they love us, but you better not ask anyone to pay their share they will move us to the hate list until they need something.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk