Bobby wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 8:43 am
In my humble opinion a big issue is the half assed support by the "West".
The West sends money and weapons and the Ukrainians are doing the dying. Without western support the war would be already long time over.
With proper western support the war would also be over, one way or the over. Because the West could say to Russia: "Leave Ukraine or we nuke Moscow" and then follow through with it......
"or we will bomb Moscow."
Bomb Moscow with what? By farting steam out of fear so that everyone in Moscow suffocates from the stench?
And seriously, I apologize, but with all due respect, your reasoning is extremely naive. I admit that you are not a military man, but still you should have an elementary notion and imagine the consequences of such a step and realize these consequences. You cannot understand that Russia is not Libya, without advanced air defense, aviation, radar systems, anti-satellite weapons, hypersonic weapons, and without the world's most technologically advanced nuclear arsenal, both strategic and tactical - the nuclear triad! Well, how do you imagine "bombing Moscow"? Or do you think that NATO will say: "We will bomb Moscow, Russia must fulfill our demands and surrender"? And, after that, Russia will say: "Okay, we are scared, and that's it - we surrender, take everything away from us!" Is that how you envision it? Or do you really suppose that NATO will start to strike Russia? Well, in that case, you should first of all order yourself a nice coffin in advance. Or do you think that there will be no retaliation?
Now let us touch on specifics and details. Do you realize that when any NATO military aircraft takes off, even near Russia's borders, fighter jets are instantly launched to intercept it, air defense and radar systems are deployed. Do you think your pilots have had enough of life? Or do you really want to launch a nuclear strike on Russia? And the radioactive ash that will be left from the USA and Europe doesn't stop you? I'm not talking about the fact that the entire NATO nuclear arsenal is obsolete. In the U.S., Minuteman and Trident missiles were put into service during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, and after that they were not practically modernized. Hypersonic carriers, you have only at the stage of testing. Recently on English television, they showed the launch pits for launching ballistic nuclear missiles, and everything there is covered with rust! After the collapse of the USSR, you fell into euphoria, and completely relaxed, sometimes destroying countries that can not answer you.
Of course, nuclear weapons, no matter what technical state they are in, are in any case dangerous, and no one wants to test them on themselves, and in principle such a development. But let's even hypothetically imagine that NATO launches a nuclear strike on Moscow, and even, let's imagine the worst case scenario for Russia, destroys the decision-making center. First, in such cases, provided for, several backup decision-making centers, and other options for action, (I will not disclose classified information), and secondly, since the Soviet era, there is an automatic system "Perimeter", in the West it is called "Dead Hand". In short, it is an automatic system, to activate the entire nuclear triad of Russia (strategic submarine missile carriers, land-based ballistic missiles, strategic airborne missile carriers), and even in the loss of the main command, the automatic delivery of a massive nuclear retaliatory strike against the enemy. That is, in any case, it is guaranteed mutual destruction!
You understand that any such development is like a "nightmare" for the U.S. and NATO, and for the rest of the world. They avoid and fear such a development in every possible way. In Ukraine, they shout to the whole world that they, personally, do not participate in the war, but only help materially. And they always emphasize this. They are in absolutely no position now to give any ultimatums to Russia, they are losing this war, regardless of all their hyped military equipment, which they supply to Ukraine. All the "praised" NATO equipment: Challengers, Leopards, Bradleys, are burning like matches in Ukraine. Western representatives have already had to confirm this. Listen to adequate American military analysts. They directly say that their popularized F-35 aircraft depends entirely on satellite guidance. Destroy the satellite, and this plane turns into flying scrap metal, a target, and a coffin for the pilot. It's the same with nuclear missile guidance. Do you think that if NATO attacks Russia directly, the latter, which has anti-satellite weapons, will spare NATO satellites? Elon Musk is already afraid to provide services to his Starlink satellite group because they could suddenly be "hit by a meteor shower". The U.S. and NATO are even afraid to supply their missiles "ATACMS" and "TAURUS", with a range of 300 kilometers, because they know that Ukraine will specifically strike directly at the territory of Russia with these missiles. Though the USA and NATO of course in any case constantly impudence and testing patience of Russia, "demonizing" Putin, though, internally, perfectly understanding that he is a restrained and adequate person, and will not put the whole world in danger without an extreme reason. Only the U.S. and NATO are taking a huge risk by "pokerface", because one day Russia's patience may run out.
The entire calculation of the collective West in the war in Ukraine, was to economic sanctions and the creation of difficulties for Russia in the armed struggle in Ukraine, to shake Russia from within, to sow social unrest, because Russia can only be destroyed or weakened by Russia itself. An example of this is the collapse of the Soviet Union, so the West planned exactly the same scenario for Russia. But not a direct armed clash, they fear it like the Devil! Well, as we can all see, all the plans of the collective West in relation to Russia, went to waste, moreover, with great economic, military and most importantly image damage for themselves. The destruction of NATO's military equipment in Ukraine has sharply diminished the world's attitude to this popularized equipment. Shares of the companies producing this equipment fell sharply.
The US, after Vietnam, will go to war only when they absolutely do not risk a painful retaliation and when they are 100% sure of a positive result for themselves. I assure you that even if you imagine a situation where Russia strikes a NATO military base in Europe, the US will not send its soldiers to fight in Europe. They will come up with a thousand reasons not to use the notorious 5th amendment of the NATO charter. And their obedient vassals will quietly whimper to themselves, but dare not say anything to their master. Yes, the U.S. will help them with military equipment, money, will use all its media capabilities, will shriek all over the world about Russia's "aggression", but they will not go to war for Europe. Moreover, it is favorable for them to start a direct armed conflict in Europe, then they can fully focus on fighting China. And if Russia launches a tactical nuclear strike, they will clap their hands in happiness, because they do not care about the people in Europe, and then the U.S. will be able to cite this precedent to China, India, and other countries in the world that support Russia, how "evil" Russia is! The main thing for the scriptwriters in the U.S., so that the war in Europe, unleashed by them, did not hurt their island, where they used to feel safe. And this is unlikely, given the available in the modern world, hypersonic and long-range means of delivery of warheads of mass destruction. Herein lies the dangerous game the US is playing. Apart from grandiose ambitions to maintain hegemony in the world, the U.S. now lacks competent analysts, soberly and adequately assessing the real situation, influencing the decision-making of the rapidly degenerating power.
And it is a pity that many people do not understand all this neither in Europe nor in Ukraine ...
