ADVERTISEMENT

This might be a little tougher than Putin thought...

From what I am reading it seems like the f16 arrivals are imminent. I wonder how many are actually going to be provided initially?
This is from March and the total number is now up to 60!

"How many F-16s is Ukraine going to get?

Countries promised the fighter jets last year, but delivering them and training pilots have proved complex. Ukraine may start with as few as six, out of about 45 pledged.Mar 11, 2024

Ukraine Could Deploy F-16s as Soon as July, but Only a Few​

The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com › World › Europe"
 
This is from March and the total number is now up to 60!

"How many F-16s is Ukraine going to get?

Countries promised the fighter jets last year, but delivering them and training pilots have proved complex. Ukraine may start with as few as six, out of about 45 pledged.Mar 11, 2024

Ukraine Could Deploy F-16s as Soon as July, but Only a Few

The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com › World › Europe"
I read that too, but I thought maybe at the beginning they are only getting 6. Who knows, probably a lot of misdirection going on. They could already being there flying around for all we know...
 
I read that too, but I thought maybe at the beginning they are only getting 6. Who knows, probably a lot of misdirection going on. They could already being there flying around for all we know...
I have. faith that there has been a lot of thought and strategizing between Ukraine and the donor nations as to how and when to first deploy them. One thing needed is dispersal and air defenses for when they are on the ground. They must be successful initially. I know that's hard to guarantee, but not just militarily, there is a tremendous national pride involved for Ukraine in this transfer. If some are shot down right away, or destroyed by a drone on the ground it will be crushing. I keep crossing my fingers that the first time we hear about them being in combat is a flight over Kyiv for the cameras right after smoking a Russian bomber trying to deliver a glide bomb on the front lines.
 
I have. faith that there has been a lot of thought and strategizing between Ukraine and the donor nations as to how and when to first deploy them. One thing needed is dispersal and air defenses for when they are on the ground. They must be successful initially. I know that's hard to guarantee, but not just militarily, there is a tremendous national pride involved for Ukraine in this transfer. If some are shot down right away, or destroyed by a drone on the ground it will be crushing. I keep crossing my fingers that the first time we hear about them being in combat is a flight over Kyiv for the cameras right after smoking a Russian bomber trying to deliver a glide bomb on the front lines.
From what I have read, when not flying they will be in underground fortified bunkers. When in the air, hopefully they can stay out of harm's way with all of the real-time information they receive from our AWACS/JSTARS/etc...
 
Last edited:
" 2 comrades sat "confiding" next to a blackened armored vehicle, an FPV drone rushed forward, 1 comrade collapsed. The remaining comrade tried to get into the car, a second FPV drone slowly got inside to look for the comrade. Hope you're okay comrade."



 
Last edited:
SYDNEY, May 3 (Reuters) - Russia will face consequences for a cyber attack allegedly orchestrated by a group with ties to its military intelligence, German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock said on Friday.
Germany has been among the Western nations providing Ukraine military support in its war with Russia, with President Vladimir Putin saying in December that ties between the two countries stay largely frozen.
From December 2022 onwards, Germany's ruling Social Democrats and companies in the logistics, defence, aerospace and IT sectors were targeted by Russian hackers, according to the interior ministry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HawkMD

Ukraine’s balloon-borne bomber blitz: Designed to waste Russian shells and missiles​


The latest Ukrainian deep-strike weapon isn’t a drone, a cruise missile or a ballistic missile. It’s a balloon.

In a recent speech, Russian defence minister Sergei Shoigu claimed Russian air defences had shot down 37 Ukrainian balloons since Russia widened its war on Ukraine starting in February 2022.

Many of the balloons arrived recently. The Kremlin reported five balloon shoot-downs on April 18 and two more on April 20 – one of the latter got as far as Moscow, 275 miles from the border with Ukraine. Another balloon crashed just inside Russian territory in March.

The balloon designs are all pretty similar: an inexpensive envelope, a simple satellite-communications relay, a bit of ballast – and a few pounds of explosives. It’s possible each balloon costs just a few hundred dollars, likely making the lighter-than-air vehicles the cheapest of Kyiv’s deep-strike weapons, which also include long-range strike drones, British- and French-made cruise missiles and ballistic missiles from the United States.

The recent barrage of balloons is part of a wider campaign of Ukrainian raids targeting strategic targets hundreds of miles inside Russia and Russian-occupied Ukraine: air bases, weapons factories and oil refineries are among the top targets.

The Ukrainians lately have been especially busy with their American-supplied Army Tactical Missile System rockets. The United States reportedly shipped more than a hundred of the precision-guided ATACMS starting in March. Ukraine wasted no time bombarding Russian air bases and air-defence batteries in Crimea and eastern Ukraine.

Ukrainian strikes on Russian air bases have escalated to the point that, in recent days, the Kremlin pulled back dozens of its best warplanes, redeploying them from bases near the front line to bases hundreds of miles away – beyond the reach of Ukraine’s cruise and ballistic missiles, although not beyond the reach of the farthest-flying strike drones.

Don’t expect the balloons to have such a serious impact on Russian operations, however. Explosive war balloons aren’t new. They’ve floated across borders in at least three wars in just the last century – and never had any meaningful impact.

This is for one major reason: they’re unguided. They just float on the wind until they can’t anymore. Japan floated nearly 300 bomb-laden balloons across the Pacific Ocean in 1944 and ’45. The only casualties were a pastor’s wife and five Sunday School students on a fishing trip in Oregon who accidentally triggered the explosive payload of a crashed balloon .

The Japanese balloon bombs were more effective than the crude bombs terror group Islamic State deployed in Syria in 2015. The tiny unguided craft – apparently just condoms full of some lighter-than-air gas and carrying miniscule explosive charges – apparently inflicted exactly zero damage on Syrian forces.

Balloons can work as wide-area surveillance systems, which is why Russia has drifted a few over Ukraine since 2022 – and why China routinely deploys them over the western Pacific Ocean and even sent a few floating over the United States last year.

But surveillance doesn’t necessarily require precision. High-resolution cameras and sensitive electronic receivers can collect useful intelligence over thousands of square miles.

An air raid does require precision: missing by just a few yards can make the difference between a successful raid and a failed one. An unguided strike balloon is, at best, a way for one country to compel another country to waste precious air-defence resources trying to shoot them down.

Smart air-defence commanders would simply ignore them. Ukrainian planners might be hoping they don’t. It’s apparent that one aim of Ukraine’s widening strike campaign – more and more drones, missiles and rockets hitting more and more bases and industrial sites – is to force Russia to spread out, and thin out, its radars and surface-to-air missile batteries.

“Ukrainian drone strikes against targets within Russia are ... likely increasing pressure on available Russian air-defence assets,” the Institute for the Study of War in Washington DC explained.

And for the Ukrainians, that pressure represents an opportunity. Thinner Russian air-defences along the front line means less risk to Ukrainian warplanes operating directly over the battlefield. “You can’t defend everywhere,” retired US Army general Mark Hertling noted.

As long as the Russians are wasting resources shooting down balloons, they’re not devoting those same resources to shooting down Ukrainian assets that actually matter. Ones with a reasonable degree of accuracy.

 

David Cameron has really impeccable foreign policy credentials:

David Cameron’s intervention in Libya was carried out with no proper intelligence analysis, drifted into an unannounced goal of regime change and shirked its moral responsibility to help reconstruct the country following the fall of Muammar Gaddafi, according to a scathing report by the foreign affairs select committee.
The failures led to the country becoming a failed a state on the verge of all-out civil war, the report adds.
The report, the product of a parliamentary equivalent of the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war, closely echoes the criticisms widely made of Tony Blair’s intervention in Iraq, and may yet come to be as damaging to Cameron’s foreign policy legacy.

How Libya is slowly becoming 'Somalia on the Med'
It concurs with Barack Obama’s assessment that the intervention was “a shitshow”, and repeats the US president’s claim that France and Britain lost interest in Libya after Gaddafi was overthrown.
 
Russian demographics have taken a hit the last 5 years. They die younger anyway due to all the smoking and rampant alcoholism, and Covid hit Russia really hard. Something like the 3rd highest death rate per capita in the world of a "developed", country. Their health care system is garbage.
I doubt they have an inexhaustible manpower supply. A mobilization that involves the fancy boys of Moscow and St. Petersburg will lead to upheaval.
 
GMuEhLvWgAAtjTL
 
The Empire Strikes Back (bad news)



FWIW

Take out all these rail lines in Western Russia, and Gazprom will plummet even further, as they will need to "truck" everything to the front lines. And they do not have either the fuel supplies or the equipment to do this.

Hitting these rail supply lines daily or hourly slices through the arteries feeding the heart of the beast. Make them unusable, and the Russians won't have either men or ammo to defend their occupied territories.
 


Looks like wounded by drones and finished off by anti-tank weapon.


Actually, none of our Western allies stood up so publicly and said that, okay, you have weapons that reach Russian territory, so hit that Russian territory. And in the end, Britain just took it and was the first to say it." - stated the expert.

He also added that, in addition to the continuation of the usual British strategy, such a step is also a strengthening of the position of French President Emmanuel Macron, who declared his readiness to send his troops to Ukraine in case of escalation by the Russian Federation.

It will be recalled that Cameron promised about $3.74 billion in annual military aid to Kyiv - "as much as needed", and also made it clear that his country is not against Ukraine's use of British weapons for strikes against Russia.

"Kyiv has the right to do that. Just as Russia is attacking Ukraine, you can fully understand why Ukraine feels the need to make sure that it defends itself," the British foreign minister said.

Former Minister of the Armed Forces of Britain James Hippie said that the defeat of Ukraine in the war with Russia will cost the West trillions of dollars , as it will lead to a new Cold War that will last for decades. Therefore, the West is interested in Ukraine winning the war.
 
David Cameron has really impeccable foreign policy credentials:

David Cameron’s intervention in Libya was carried out with no proper intelligence analysis, drifted into an unannounced goal of regime change and shirked its moral responsibility to help reconstruct the country following the fall of Muammar Gaddafi, according to a scathing report by the foreign affairs select committee.
The failures led to the country becoming a failed a state on the verge of all-out civil war, the report adds.
The report, the product of a parliamentary equivalent of the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war, closely echoes the criticisms widely made of Tony Blair’s intervention in Iraq, and may yet come to be as damaging to Cameron’s foreign policy legacy.

How Libya is slowly becoming 'Somalia on the Med'
It concurs with Barack Obama’s assessment that the intervention was “a shitshow”, and repeats the US president’s claim that France and Britain lost interest in Libya after Gaddafi was overthrown.
Man, you really like throwing out the Putin Propaganda in this thread, don'tcha?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT