Kyiv Independent posted:

Investigation: Leaked document exposes Kremlin's 10-year plan to undermine Moldova

As Russia is waging war in Ukraine, it also seeks to increase its already strong influence in Moldova, a nation of 2.6 million people that borders Ukraine and the EU.

According to a leaked document obtained by an international consortium of media outlets, including the Kyiv Independent, Moscow is planning to gain vast control over the country by 2030.

A Western intelligence source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the Kremlin's Directorate for Cross-Border Cooperation had allegedly created the document, titled "Strategic goals of the Russian Federation in the Republic of Moldova," in 2021.

According to the document, Russia’s key goals are to ensure that Moldovan policymakers and society, in general, have a negative attitude toward NATO and that the country has a strong presence of pro-Russian influence groups in politics and the economy.

The document envisions Transnistria remaining a breakaway region with Russian troops still stationed there. Russian media should have a wide presence in Moldova, while the Russian language in the country must have an official status.

One of the so-called "realistic 10-year goals" is to "counter the attempts of external actors" – like neighboring Romania, other EU member states, or the U.S. – "to interfere in the internal affairs of Moldova, strengthen the influence of NATO, and weaken the positions of Russia."

As a counterweight, the document envisions Moldova’s deeper involvement in the Collective Security Treaty Organization, Moscow's version of NATO, and the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union.

zone posted:

https://twitter.com/sternenko/status/1638554308659617797
Why are these morons still convinced that an amphibious assault will even happen?

Dwesa posted:

on Russian inefficient demining

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1638658220955713539

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1638661428230987784

Mokotow posted:

Oh man, coming up on a year. I remember driving Pegleg to the border at night. It was still early-ish days, so the towns on the Polish-Ukrainian border were the last sources of light and as we drove to the Medyka crossing, beyond which there was just utter darkness. poo poo got real solem in that last stretch, esp. after a week of loving about in Warsaw. It was the middle of the night when we came into the Polish border office with bags of various gear and Leg’s, well, peg leg, to the bemusment of the lone Polish border guard inside. Old Leg got in, bounced around and came out a few weeks later and there’s at least a few dozen UA army guys that benefited directly from him being there.

zone posted:

https://twitter.com/AndrewPerpetua/status/1638555139853172737

Just Another Lurker posted:

You were running all over the place at the time, your posting & Edgar Alan Hoes back then made it real to me back then.

Drone_Fragger posted:

For reference as to "how many Abram's does the USA actually have", congress repeatedly orders them more tanks (because of the tank factories variously located in congressmen's districts and hence pork barelling :hogwilde:), which the Army is repeatedly begging them not to buy, as they're having to spend more of their budget on maintaining and repairing tanks they didn't ask or want, in a depot in the middle of a desert. I literally think at this point they could give away like 1000 abrams and the us army would be happy about it because they could move several thousand support staff away from doing nothing.

Butterfly Valley posted:

Aren't most of those gonna be the versions with the secret armour that aren't for sharing

CSM posted:

Ukraine has gotten t55's as well (although probably much better upgraded).

A tank is still a tank even if its ancient, it needs to be dealt with.

The good news is that more modern stockpiles of tanks might be running out.

Drone_Fragger posted:

For reference as to "how many Abram's does the USA actually have", congress repeatedly orders them more tanks (because of the tank factories variously located in congressmen's districts and hence pork barelling :hogwilde:), which the Army is repeatedly begging them not to buy, as they're having to spend more of their budget on maintaining and repairing tanks they didn't ask or want, in a depot in the middle of a desert. I literally think at this point they could give away like 1000 abrams and the us army would be happy about it because they could move several thousand support staff away from doing nothing.

zone posted:

M-55s that Slovenia gave em, yep. Uparmored, better electronics, and thermal sights thrown in.

Der Kyhe posted:

If it comes to relatively static dug in front-lines akin to WW1, and WW2 in some places, improvised catapults and slings for throwing hand grenades over the no-mans land will surely make a comeback.

EDIT:


here is an example from the FDF during WW2.

Karate Bastard posted:

Angry Blyats.

zone posted:

https://twitter.com/sternenko/status/1638554308659617797
Why are these morons still convinced that an amphibious assault will even happen?

Woolie Wool posted:

thunderspanks posted:

I'm not watching an hour long video but I'm gonna throw this out there anyway: are you sure you understand comedy

Woolie Wool posted:

You can make a joke without telling dumbass lies that can be debunked in five minutes of googling, especially if you're (like LazerPig) cited as an authority by NATO/Ukraine supporters when arguing against RUSSIA STRONK vatniks. This plays directly into the hands of vatniks screaming about the ebil wect and it was completely unnecessary since, again, there are a lot of real-life, actually-existing reasons why the T-14 is a boondoggle that will accomplish nothing and you could make jokes about those failings and they would be all the funnier because you wouldn't have to tell a lie to make the jokes.

E: Putin should call LazerPig up and ask him how much hard currency he demands in order to defect because if he can say poo poo like this and people still defend him he's a hell of a propaganda asset.

Karma Comedian posted:

I felt like that was obvious comedic hyperbole

zone posted:

https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1638662003416866816
It seems some vatniks have begun waking up. RIA Novosti published a cope article today about how T-62 was better than weak westoid tanks. This one dude whose comment got translated here finally gets it, that once the big soviet hoard is gone, Russia is helpless.

mobby_6kl posted:

Uh-oh, looks like someone's disrespecting the armed forces!

E: though to be fair, some of the tanks are Leo1s with no armor so maybe they're not wrong until the M1A3s show up.

Karma Comedian posted:

I felt like that was obvious comedic hyperbole

Drone_Fragger posted:

It's the optics. If your tank blows up 1000 metres before you can even see the enemy tank then it doesn't matter if the enemy tank didn't have armour on.

Drone_Fragger posted:

For reference as to "how many Abram's does the USA actually have", congress repeatedly orders them more tanks (because of the tank factories variously located in congressmen's districts and hence pork barelling :hogwilde:), which the Army is repeatedly begging them not to buy, as they're having to spend more of their budget on maintaining and repairing tanks they didn't ask or want, in a depot in the middle of a desert. I literally think at this point they could give away like 1000 abrams and the us army would be happy about it because they could move several thousand support staff away from doing nothing.

Drone_Fragger posted:

For reference as to "how many Abram's does the USA actually have", congress repeatedly orders them more tanks (because of the tank factories variously located in congressmen's districts and hence pork barelling :hogwilde:), which the Army is repeatedly begging them not to buy

Cugel the Clever posted:

If I'm not completely misremembering, I believe Perun made a salient counterpoint in one of his videos. While ungodly expensive, keeping the factories up and down the supply chain churning helps ensure ability to quickly produce replacements. The know-how is there, the processes are in place, the integration points are tried and tested—hell, if the system is working right, efficiencies are actively being advanced. Contrast that with Germany or Russia's dysfunctional defense manufacturing, where rising to meet demand from a handful of artisanally-made tanks a year to a full-blown war footing would be a nightmare at best.

That's not to credit Congress too much as I imagine they're looking more at their campaign donations and the employment of their constituents than the hard numbers on production necessary to maintain a sufficient readiness level, but still.

Woolie Wool posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-opSlCGLGQ4
LazerPig dropped a video on the T-14 that says such an obvious and stupid lie about Russian engines that it casts his credibility on basically anything into question. He decides to poo poo on the Soviet/Russian V series of tank engines, which in itself would be fine since they have a much larger displacement yet less power than NATO tank engines. However, the already embarrassing reality that Russian engines make 30-50% less power than the modern MTU V12 engines (750-1130 horsepower vs. about 1500) from 40% more displacement (~39 liters vs. ~27 liters) is apparently not good enough for him, he then claims that a Russian V-series engine's torque output is comparable to that of a Honda Jazz, a statement I had to look into.

The 38.8-liter V-2 V12 engine that propelled the T-34--mind you, this was an engine that first ran in 1937--made around 1,600 lb. ft. of torque, which is a figure very similar to that of the British and German tank engines of WWII. Meanwhile, the Honda Jazz's diesel option was the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_N_engine, a 1.5 liter inline four (you might see a problem here) produced...wait for it...148 lb. ft. of torque. Then he goes on to say, while showing video footage of a new Ford Ranger, that you could go into an American dealer and buy a pickup truck with a better engine than the T-14's. So I looked up the Ranger and it's got a 2.3 liter four making...310 lb. ft. of torque.

But let's be generous, let's assume he meant the most extravagant brodozer that a hundred thousand dollars can buy. The Ford F-350 can be optioned with a monster 6.7 liter diesel producing 1,050 lb. ft. of torque. Now that's pretty weak by modern tank standards (the MTU 883 in the latest generation Merkava makes around 3,300 lb. ft.) but at least in the cheap seats of the same ballpark as serious WWII tank engines like the V-2 and Rolls-Royce Meteor. But ah, the Meteor is a naturally-aspirated lazy 27-liter lump (and the V-2 even bigger and lazier than that) while the Power Stroke engine has to be turbocharged up the rear end to make that much torque, and thus has less room to be overloaded. The GCWR (the maximum weight it can move around including the truck itself and the heaviest possible trailer) of a 6.7 liter diesel F-350 is 30,000 lbs. or about 13.6 metric tons. A Panzer III, on the small end of WWII tanks, is about 23 metric tons and used a smaller, weaker engine than mid/late-war German tanks.

And the worst part is this hilariously absurd pants-on-fire lie about Russian engines was completely unnecessary considering the fact that the T-14 is dependent on Western electronic systems that Russia cannot make, has no realistic pathway to being able to make, and after deciding to invade Ukraine, cannot buy, and thus the T-14 is vaporware no matter what engine it has. And if he's willing to tell this whopper that is so blatantly false and so blatantly stupid, what else has he lied about?

Viller posted:

Hes not saying of that as fact, its a loving joke... You cant be serious right?

Zero VGS posted:

Maybe they should go post about it on War Thunder forums