|
tehinternet posted:Not gonna lie, I’d be thrilled to hear a “very diverse group of totally not NATO personnel” has appeared to serve in the defense efforts or to totally not operate NATO equipment
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 07:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:37 |
|
|
AJA posted:Oh, we got all types! Bug, Dragon, Electric, Fighting, Fire, Flying, Ghost, Grass, Ground, Ice, Normal, Poison, Psychic, Rock, and Water. Weird we somehow don't have any Steel types, you'd think we'd start there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 07:38
|
|
|
Elotana posted:They're setting the population up for full reserve mobilization What would full mobilization of the Russian Military look like exactly? I think they still have some absurd amount of manpower in reserve but would that include armor and transports too? Or have they already used up anything that would actually be of practical use to the war effort?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 07:39
|
|
|
MechanicalTomPetty posted:What would full mobilization of the Russian Military look like exactly? I think they still have some absurd amount of manpower in reserve but would that include armor and transports too? Or have they already used up anything that would actually be of practical use to the war effort? Hard to tell other than it would be a poo poo show to end all poo poo shows
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 07:42
|
|
|
Sir John Falstaff posted:Also, the Moskva wasn't modern--it was probably approaching the end of its service life anyway; there would be no point in investing the kind of resources that would be necessary to raise it and repair it into a 43-year-old Soviet cruiser, even if it were possible. Whoa hey the Moskva just had an expensive retrofit in...2020? It was supposed to serve until the 2040's. This isn't accurate. Russia has a major tactical (but not strategic) loss here. "We didn't want that battlecruiser anyway."- Oh yes they very much did. This is a painful loss.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 07:43
|
|
|
Sir John Falstaff posted:Also, the Moskva wasn't modern--it was probably approaching the end of its service life anyway; there would be no point in investing the kind of resources that would be necessary to raise it and repair it into a 43-year-old Soviet cruiser, even if it were possible. Moskva was recently refurbished and was expected to be in service until 2040. At this point it's sunk cost  e: I should add that even if Moskva was just damaged by fire and some flooding and was able to limb back to Sevastopol, repairs would take over a year if there weren't sanctions in place that made it much harder than before to replace the more delicate electronics in radars etc. Procuring a replacement will also take many, many years and if Moskva was expected to serve for two more decades then I doubt they had the replacement even on drawing table yet. Black Sea Fleet is hosed. Nenonen fucked around with this message at 08:09 on Apr 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 07:51
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:Whoa hey the Moskva just had an expensive retrofit in...2020? It was supposed to serve until the 2040's. This isn't accurate. Russia has a major tactical (but not strategic) loss here. Again, I'm not saying it wasn't a valuable target for Ukraine, or a big loss for Russia. What I'm saying is that it wouldn't make sense to raise and repair it, even if it would be possible to do so. It would make much more sense to build a new ship instead (assuming Russia could afford to do either of those options--spending money on cruisers is arguably not the best use of Russia's defense budget anyway). Raising and repairing it would mean going to vast expense to raise it, transport it somewhere it could be repaired, going to even greater expense to repair it, spending years in dry dock, and winding up with . . . an outdated cruiser that might last another 10 years before needing to be replaced anyway. Nenonen posted:Moskva was recently refurbished and was expected to be in service until 2040. At this point it's sunk cost Yes, and now they have a 43-year-old hull at the bottom of the Black Sea. Sir John Falstaff fucked around with this message at 08:17 on Apr 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 07:52
|
|
|
Sir John Falstaff posted:All of the battleships raised from Pearl Harbor were significantly younger than the Moskva is now--around 20-27 years old compared to around 43 years old. To be fair we have older active flagships than Moskva in the US. Blue Ridge in the Seventh Fleet is 53 years old. We don't even have plans to replace it for nearly another 20 years. The difference is we actually took steps to modernize and service it, at which point a working hull is a working hull. If you keep the electronics up to date well.....who gives a poo poo if it does the job? The Moskva being old isn't the problem, innately. It's that they haven't done the work to keep it modern or used it effectively. At which point even the newest class in the world will still get smoked if you are a moron.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 07:54
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:Whoa hey the Moskva just had an expensive retrofit in...2020? It was supposed to serve until the 2040's. This isn't accurate. Russia has a major tactical (but not strategic) loss here. It's one of the 6 ships the Russians had that would be the center of a battlegroup, the others being their one aircraft carrier, the two Kirov-class battlecruisers and their other 2 Slava-class cruisers. With the loss of the Moskva they lost the center of their Black Sea Fleet battlegroup, which degrades their force posture in the region (Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea, Sea of Azov) dramatically. This is probably a strategic loss as it cripples their ability to threaten Odessa, which should free up some Ukrainian forces or at least allow Ukraine to prioritize other forces when it comes to distributing the weapons they get.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:03
|
|
|
MechanicalTomPetty posted:What would full mobilization of the Russian Military look like exactly? I think they still have some absurd amount of manpower in reserve but would that include armor and transports too? Or have they already used up anything that would actually be of practical use to the war effort? They have enough guns and tanks to equip about as many troops as they could ever want, but the quality of that equipment will start from below what they're already using, and go down from there. And much more importantly, the quality of the new troops will also start from below what they have and proceed downwards. Considering the clown-college army they're already using, there's a solid chance a rapidly mobilized army of Russia would be more dangerous to Russia than to anyone else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:07
|
|
|
Sir John Falstaff posted:Yes, and now they have a 43-year-old hull at the bottom of the Black Sea. The new ships that Russia wants to build aren't going to be around for a long time. Age isn't something that is a problem when it comes to military hardware. The 1911 and Browning M2 are nearly 100 years old but they're still pumped out and modernized. Why? Because they are fine pieces of machinery that do exactly what they're meant to do. Just look at the AK-47. It's also very old, but it's cheap to make, reliable, and easy to use. That's why it's so good. The age of a ship doesn't matter if you can keep it up to date with the latest systems and protocols. That's why it was retrofitted in 2020 and meant to be in service until the 2040's. This isn't something they can just easily replace in a couple years. This is literally comparable to the United States losing a super-carrier. It's the flagship of the fleet in the black sea. That's a big deal and a big cost. Nelson Mandingo fucked around with this message at 08:21 on Apr 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:17
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:The new ships that Russia wants to build aren't going to be around for a long time. Age isn't something that is a problem when it comes to military hardware. The 1911 and Browning M2 are nearly 100 years old but they're still pumped out and modernized. Why? Because they are fine pieces of machinery that do exactly what they're meant to do. The age of a ship doesn't matter if you keep it up to date with the latest systems and protocols. That's why it was retrofitted in 2020 and meant to be in service until the 2040's. I'm not sure what you're arguing about--I'm not disagreeing that it's a big loss.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:18
|
|
|
Sir John Falstaff posted:I'm not sure what you're arguing about--I'm not disagreeing that it's a big loss. Sure. I'm just pointing this out because you're talking about the age of the ship and how Russia will eventually replace it- but it's really not that easy. I just want it to be clear to other readers who might not immediately understand that hey, no, this is a huge humiliating loss.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:23
|
|
|
Tomberforce posted:
What happened to Photoshop Phriday? and the front page of SA? This would be prime material for a PP. Kraftwerk posted:A while earlier a US Jet landed somewhere in Europe that gets used exclusively for clandestine operations. Probably just some CIA guys going on vacation, completely on their own time and volition. Chicken Butt posted:Imagine how frustrated they must be that their mission this time is to *prevent* a foreign government from being overthrown. “Aww man, why can’t we Allende this Zelensky guy?? Can we Allende him just a *little* bit?” The CIA did a ton of propping up foreign governments to prevent (or try to) them from being overthrown, too, e.g. the king of Libya. Saladman fucked around with this message at 08:27 on Apr 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:24
|
|
|
Regarding Pearl Harbor recovery, it’s worth remembering that the US was the wealthiest and most industrialized country in the world at the time and could afford to throw practically unlimited resources at whatever they felt like. Russia is, uh, not that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:25
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/gp_ukraine/status/1514841911772725254?s=21&t=rMG6V2VQFfOK8d3odf2fjQ No clue on the accuracy of the numbers, but it gives you an idea of what type of charges Ukraine is looking into.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:26
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:Sure. I'm just pointing this out because you're talking about the age of the ship and how Russia will eventually replace it- but it's really not that easy. I just want it to be clear to other readers who might not immediately understand that hey, no, this is a huge humiliating loss. Totally agree there, and if I had to guess I'd guess that it's unlikely to be replaced any time in the near future--Russia hasn't built a ship larger than a frigate in a couple decades, and there were reasons for that even before the sanctions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:36
|
|
|
Russia really likes to keep naval ships around for as long as possible. They have a Submarine salvage ship thats still in service and was built in 19 loving 12. It served in the Czars navy, the Soviet navy, and now the Russian navy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_salvage_ship_Kommuna
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:36
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:The new ships that Russia wants to build aren't going to be around for a long time. Age isn't something that is a problem when it comes to military hardware. The 1911 and Browning M2 are nearly 100 years old but they're still pumped out and modernized. Why? Because they are fine pieces of machinery that do exactly what they're meant to do. Just look at the AK-47. It's also very old, but it's cheap to make, reliable, and easy to use. That's why it's so good. Actually Russia can't build the ships it wants to build because the Soviet drydock in which all the capital class ships were built is in Mykolaiv, which is why their new carriers only exist on paper. The loss of capability after the collapse of the USSR in the area of shipbuilding is easily underestimated, but outside the US capital ship building basically ceased to exist until the China's carrier program started to take off, whose first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning was built on a rotting, never completed, Kuznetsov-class sold by Ukraine.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:38
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:NATO sabotaged the ship by hitting the crew with the incompetence gun They got lucky. Or unlucky depending on how you look at it. Could have been one of these: https://allthatsinteresting.com/gay-bomb Be gay; do war crimes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:44
|
|
|
Germany continuing to show its entire rear end https://twitter.com/vonderburchard/status/1514837738633191429
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:50
|
|
|
Youth Decay posted:Germany continuing to show its entire rear end Personally I think Russia a bit pre-occupied at this moment to attack NATO you spineless coward
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:53
|
|
|
Youth Decay posted:Germany continuing to show its entire rear end “SURPRISING development:” Pffffffffft…
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 08:54
|
|
|
Twitter's having a normal one over the Finland comments Peskov made back on Monday https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1514754122506985473?s=20&t=uPv8_PEVlBIKTVAubkTJ0A I guess this is still correct? CommieGIR posted:They can claim that all they want, they don't have the units and even moreso, even pre-NATO membership it would likely be treated as a trigger for NATO. And they know this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 09:06
|
|
|
https://motor.ru/news/lada-simplified-13-04-2022.htm Because of sanctions, Russia will start making simplified versions of Lada. They will be built without airbags, ABS, ESP and satellite navigation. Whether or not they will get catalytic converters is still a mystery. This is great news for all of us Russian dashcam video aficionados.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 09:34
|
|
|
But where will they get dashcams from?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 09:43
|
|
|
Just pull the bandage off all at once and bring back the Trebant.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 09:48
|
|
|
Trabant was from DDR. I'm surprised they can't source ABS, ESP and airbag modules from China.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 09:55
|
|
|
alex314 posted:Trabant was from DDR. I'm surprised they can't source ABS, ESP and airbag modules from China. Doing that would cost more money than just leaving those things off and pocketing the money they used to pay for them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 10:15
|
|
|
AJA posted:Oh, we got all types! Bug, Dragon, Electric, Fighting, Fire, Flying, Ghost, Grass, Ground, Ice, Normal, Poison, Psychic, Rock, and Water. You forgot Fairy  therobit posted:They got lucky. Or unlucky depending on how you look at it. Could have been one of these:
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 10:15
|
|
|
raifield posted:Just pull the bandage off all at once and bring back the Trebant. Hey now, I've spent most of my childhood in an amazing butter colour Trabant 601 universal traveling everywhere this side of the iron curtain. I can still smell it. Here have a Trabant quality control video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIAYxWCXF8A
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 10:25
|
|
alex314 posted:Trabant was from DDR. I'm surprised they can't source ABS, ESP and airbag modules from China. That's the effect secondary sanctions have. Basically, if you do stuff that is prohibited by (primary) US sanctions, such as selling microchips to Russia, your business will get sanctioned. Therefore even firms that are in "neutral" countries will have to decide whether they want to export to ~the West~ or Russia, in which case Russia usually will lose.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 10:30
|
|
|
Interesting Twitter thread on the sinking of the Russian ship. https://twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1514701344266928131?t=H0rQWYOp3FJHurixlDkdDQ&s=19
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 10:33
|
|
|
Youth Decay posted:Germany continuing to show its entire rear end I'm one of those assholes who thinks the west deferring to Russia's red lines is largely necessary but even I'm laughing my rear end off at this guy's self-serving reasoning. Like, how do you cite the concerns of nebulous "NATO allies" as a smokescreen for his own position when Stoltenberg is on record saying that the distinction between offensive and defensive weapons is meaningless in a defensive war. Hell, the Czech Republic has already sent tanks! And the influx of heavy weapons is going to be restrained by the stock Ukrainian forces are trained for, in any case. To quote from the article "One potential solution being considered would have eastern European countries send Soviet-era tanks to Ukraine in exchange for more modern tanks from Germany or other NATO allies. In theory, the proposal would allow Ukrainian troops to more easily use and maintain the equipment, which is identical to Ukrainian tanks, while giving NATO’s eastern flank a military upgrade. Meanwhile, the military alliance would avoid antagonizing Russia by directly sending its modern tanks to Ukraine."
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 10:40
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ukraine/status/1514698388926873604
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 10:43
|
|
|
PerilPastry posted:I'm one of those assholes who thinks the west deferring to Russia's red lines is largely necessary but even I'm laughing my rear end off at this guy's self-serving reasoning. Like, how do you cite the concerns of nebulous "NATO allies" as a smokescreen for his own position when Stoltenberg is on record saying that the distinction between offensive and defensive weapons is meaningless in a defensive war. Hell, the Czech Republic has already sent tanks! It's very 'I hope my domestic audience remains disengaged on foreign affairs enough not to realise that I'm saying the opposite of what everyone else in NATO is saying'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 10:48
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/hergravce/status/1514886706058641413?t=zfXOi_hCfnFMI0Dtz-EWGQ&s=19 Arranging for a small fleet of construction vehicles to do "would be a shame if something happened to it" to a memorial, very normal behaviour
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 11:17
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:https://twitter.com/hergravce/status/1514886706058641413?t=zfXOi_hCfnFMI0Dtz-EWGQ&s=19 loving DO IT YOU COWARDS Go on, piss on the one thing commemorating the atrocities you fuckers tried to sweep under the rug, the effects of which we still feel in the polish politics today. Also the visit there was the reason for the Smolensk flight, come on, piss off the Polish people more. Oh and while you're there, please document the whole thing and broadcast it to the whole world. Amazing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 11:29
|
|
|
It's not that dumb of an idea from Kremlin side: there's a ton of Red Army memorials in Poland, so they count on some retaliatory action that would feed into internal propaganda. "We had 600.000 of our brave troops die liberating them, and now they desecrate their memory!" I've lost some sanity checking loving tvp.info site, but it doesn't look like those fuckwits picked it up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 11:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:37 |
|
|
fatherboxx posted:https://twitter.com/hergravce/status/1514886706058641413?t=zfXOi_hCfnFMI0Dtz-EWGQ&s=19 alex314 posted:It's not that dumb of an idea from Kremlin side: there's a ton of Red Army memorials in Poland, so they count on some retaliatory action that would feed into internal propaganda. "We had 600.000 of our brave troops die liberating them, and now they desecrate their memory!" After some further digging, this apprently is in response to "demolishing of soviet monuments in Poland": https://twitter.com/TadeuszGiczan/status/1514894841309708295?t=P5S55FX0Svd5nu80GocNhQ&s=19 "Resolve the Katyn issue once and for all." ah so we're back to "final solution" I see.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 11:34
|
|