Topic: Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress] - page 17. (Read 79973 times)

paxmao, paxmao...always badly informed:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68355395

SLBM is just subset to ICBM

Even chatGPT knows that:

"Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) are categorized based on their launch platforms. Here are the primary types:

1. Land-based ICBMs
These are deployed in fixed, often heavily protected silos or mobile platforms on land.
Examples:
Silo-based ICBMs: Installed in reinforced underground silos to enhance survivability (e.g., Minuteman III in the U.S.).
Mobile ICBMs: Mounted on road or rail-mobile systems for increased mobility and survivability (e.g., Russia’s RS-24 Yars, China’s DF-41).
Advantages: Cost-effective to maintain, can remain on alert for extended periods.
Disadvantages: Fixed silos are vulnerable to preemptive strikes unless mobile.

2. Submarine-launched Ballistic Missiles (SLBMs)
These are launched from ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), enabling stealthy, mobile deterrence.
Examples:
U.S. Trident II (D5) SLBMs, deployed on Ohio-class submarines.
Russia’s R-30 Bulava, deployed on Borei-class submarines.
Advantages: Highly survivable due to mobility and stealth; harder to target.
Disadvantages: Submarine maintenance and operation are expensive and complex.

3. Air-launched Ballistic Missiles (ALBMs)
These are launched from strategic bombers or other aircraft.
While not traditionally classified as ICBMs, similar concepts exist for medium-range ballistic missiles deployed from the air.
Examples:
Experimental or conceptual designs (no operational systems widely deployed as ICBMs).
Advantages: Flexibility in deployment locations.
Disadvantages: Limited payload size and less survivability compared to other platforms.

4. Space-based or Orbital Launch Platforms (Hypothetical)
These involve launching missiles from orbital platforms or space vehicles, often speculative and not in active use.
Advantages: Global reach with short reaction times.
Disadvantages: High cost, potential treaty violations, and destabilization concerns.
Key Considerations
Each type is suited to different strategic needs, with land-based systems forming the backbone of nuclear deterrence and SLBMs providing second-strike capabilities."


You're welcome

It's logical that people in control of this continue escalations despite the will of the majority that has to bear the consequences, and they have no legal leverage to do anything about it? What the percentage of people must want negotiations and be ready to territorial concessions, for these escalations to become illogical for you?

Are you saying you were supporting all these sacrifices that Ukraine people had to endure, based solely on your hope of "unlimited and prompt support of US", really and that's after Afghanistan?

But we all know that once this stops, real losses have to be released on both sides, and people will start asking tough questions like who's responsible for this all, and what was the point of ignoring Russia's security concerns and why UA's government volunteered it's population for this exercise While the contents of the Western responses were not released, U.S. and NATO leaders were clear that their responses did not make any concessions on several core Russian demands — such as blocking Ukraine from NATO — even if they are willing to discuss other concerns. Would you be interested in one side declassifying Russia security demands, and US and NATO's written responses in 2021?

We should make a poll, whether Zelenskiy will run to US or UK after negotiations?

I find it logical. After three years of war Ukrainians want to leave in peace. Now, what each of them understand as a negotiated peace may be quite different from what you think is a negotiated peace. I am not surprised, Trump is signalling that he is either less supportive or not supportive at all of continuing to help Ukraine and Ukraine on its own cannot match the numbers of Ruzzia. I guess that if the US were promissing unlimited and prompt support this would be looking very different.

And now... lets look a the Ruzzian polls... you would not want to cherry-pick right? You would never do that?

https://www.russiamatters.org/blog/poll-majority-russians-would-oppose-returning-land-even-if-putin-decides-return-it-part-peace


Branko, Branko... you seem so eager to glow green in the dark, and always looking for "the right sources"... Well it would be quite difficult to test a UK ICBM:

https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/arms-control-and-proliferation-profile-united-kingdom#:~:text=The%20United%20Kingdom%20does%20not%20poss


The missile that hit a command center today is a Stormshadow. It carries a technology that is 40 years more advanced and more difficult to put together than an ICMB. So.... yes... just trust that UK cannot answer. Oh, and trust that the US nor France won't answer... you know... that NATO thing ... article 5.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-qGLb003t4

Don't you find it interesting that more than half of Ukrainians want negotiations, to end the war as soon as possible. But instead they are told to continue and escalate with ATACMS and then they need to brace for retaliation with ICBMs or medium range ballistics. It's like no one really cares what Ukrainian people want, others know better than them, and Ukrainians are just playing their roll in all of this. Not like they can even vote now

A medium-range missile can travel between 1,000 kilometers and 3,000 kilometers (620 miles to 1,860 miles), according to the Center for Arms Control and Anti-Proliferation.

Distance from Kaliningrad to London is 1500km, Berlin 500km, Paris 1400km

According to Putin, it was mid range ballistic missile, not ICBM:
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-launches-intercontinental-ballistic-missile-attack-ukraine-kyiv-says-2024-11-21/
It was response after Ukraine's attack in Russian territory using Western missiles. It's supposed to be a warning, showing what Russia can do. But INO, we didn't saw anything what we didn't saw before. Most of their missiles like Kinzhal or Iskander can carry nuclear warheads

I think you missed the fact that, for example, UK could not successfully do ICBM launch for decades, and also most
western analysts said Russian ones are equally bad. But:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/nwSOOztYs73F

Yes, apparently Ruzzia has used an ICBM, with no nuclear warhead of course. I guess that is to showcase that they have... ICBMs, a technology from the 50s and can launch them... like everyone knows they can since the 50s. Only difference here, these can be detected much more easily than cruise, albeit they are quite difficult to intercept.

There are some claiming that it was not the case though...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_P8aYIMNBg

However, vampires flew in both directions as expected and Ukraine hit an military near "Putin's palace" with at least one cruise missile.

https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-russia-war-trump-putin-zelenskyy-latest-12541713?postid=4536299

https://www.barrons.com/news/russian-envoy-claims-uk-now-directly-involved-in-ukraine-war-77f9cdfd


Well, my guess is that UK and the rest of Europe have been involved in the war since Ruzzia interfered with elections, referendums, ... not to mention the continuous cyberattacks to official organisations. I guess UK could perfectly claim that Iran and Norht Korea are "directly involved" in the war.

Dnipro is purported to be the site chosen for Russia's 'ICBM' demonstration, though I personally am a ways from considering any of the various reports so far to be representative of objective reality.

Dnipro would be an interesting choice since for years the idea of 'Heavenly Jerusalem' have been floating around, and Dnipro is purported to be the center of the center.  In my quick scan this is the first map I pulled up:

  https://x.com/SamuelSokol/status/1704002720082928032

I would again call attention to the interesting observation that very early in the 'SMO' at the latest, plans for funding the reconstruction of 'Ukraine' had been put forward: the goyim pay, of course, and the cost is projected to be measured in $1,000,000,000,000's.  Obviously this is on top of the $1,000,000,000's we paid to destroy it first.  Explains why buying big chunks of Ukraine was a compelling 'investment' for read-in players such as Fink/Blackrock.

Note that the destruction of parts of Dnipro by the Russians in no way indicates that they would not be involved in the putative Heavenly Jerusalem Project plan.  More likely the opposite given that reconstruction is already planned out.  Only time will tell what Russia's actual disposition happens to be.  I'd make a weak-ish bet that 'peace', when it finally comes, involves Russia's generous granting of most of the lands that the 'chosen' ones desire.  Time will tell.

The biggest issue with such logic is that you're (either intentionally or naively) ignoring the consequences. What you're essentially saying is that you're ok with a global precedence where a nuclear power can provide advance weaponry and advisors/support team to provide targeting, to a third country to attack another nuclear power. Are you sure that you've completely thought this through and are ok with what the possible consequences of this in the future? From top of my head, why wouldn't RU send ballistics to Syria and Yemen, who's gonna stop them, and how, threaten RU back with nukes so that they don't? Idiots are getting us to a point of both sides threatening each other with nukes, and then the other idiots on both sides are cheering this.

Sucks, but can't say it's unexpected, history shows that we have to once again reach a pinnacle in escalation before we realize that we'll kill each other and can deescalate.

What possible upside do you expect to see out of this decision at this point in the game?

Lol. Where have you been? All anybody need do is look at a war map to see who controls what part of the Black Sea Corridor.

You are right. I mixed the two up. It is the Poseidon torpedo, which is a reality, and could take the UK out any time Putin wanted to use it.

The thing you like to do is focus on tiny points to take people's eyes off the whole picture. Ukraine is like the mouse, cornered by the cat (Russia) and has almost no strength left to fight. Russia is just playing with Ukraine.

The concept of analyzing current events and using the analyses to make predictions about future events is, I've found, nearly impossible to explain to normies.  That's one of the reason why most normies never get anywhere financially or in almost any other way.  They live their lives pay-check to pay-check and are typically plowed under before their expected lifespan after being damaged by elements of the corp/gov plantation system never having the foggiest clue about what's going on...and never giving a damn anyway.

Nobody I can think of is competent for me to listen to about almost anything, and certainly not something as complex as the geo-politics surrounding the Russian SMO.  Sure, I've got sources who I pay more attention to in order to understand objective reality.  On the other end of the spectrum there is an ocean of propaganda which is also worth paying some attention to so I know what is going on in hive mind of the low-info classes (e.g., nutildah).  That information is also valuable in formulating predictions to make use of in structuring my own life.

It blows me away that the typical mainstream media sources who, several years ago, were circulating stories about the Russians fighting with shovels are still credible to people like yourself.  But there it is.  Shrug.

Ukraine is using the corridor since months ago BA, it is open and in full business since two years ago. Putin is giving the image of a leader that does not care about loses and his only strategy has been doubling down on every mistake.

If you look at the history of Ukraine you will see that Lithuania, Ukrainia and Moscow have swaped positions of power and control many times.

You are confusing the so called Satan with a theoretical nuclear torpedo, but it is a well debunked myth that tsunamis can be produced with it.

All you have posted here is pure shit BA. Your head is not empty, it actually contains a unique powerful magnets that attracts cow shit like Trump attracts moths.

A missile goes along smoothly, pooping out hot air, until the end of its trajectory, when there is a blast. I respect the idea that Putin might be waiting for Trump. The question is, how long will he wait? Will he wait until Russia is destroyed by the West's missiles in the next two months until Trump takes office?

Russia is giving the image of a strong leader. After all, Ukraine not only has been unable to take the Black Sea Corridor back, but they are losing ground every day in the war, and they are using old guys and kids for their military because they have run out of real fighting soldiers long ago. Ukraine shooting missiles into Russia is their last fighting resort.

When you look at the history of Ukraine, Ukraine has always been a puppet country, controlled by some other country. In fact, that was part of the reason why it was set up as a country in the first place. This war is sorta like a civil war... like a sassy child pushing back against a parent. For a while it looked like the sassy child had grown up. But then it accepted Western control, and now it is going to die.... unless Trump lets Putin stabilize the area. In that case, Zelensky might be spared to go back to his old naked comedian job.

However, regarding the UK, 90% of it would be gone in one hour if Putin launched a couple of his underwater Satan II nuclear missiles Off the UK coast. The tsunami tidal wave that would follow would wash right across the UK. Yet the UK leaders want to go right on teasing Putin. Super-stupid.

It is just BA's land talk. There is not even the basic level of rational thinking behind any of what he has posted. Putin has nothing to win using nuclear weapons when Trump is about to take over the US in January, in his mind Putin is a pacifist, the UK (a nuclear power) won't last a week... etc.

It seems that US and UK leaders (in BA land this people know less than him) are doing exactly the opposite of what he says... but again, they do not live in BA land.

This night will be bad, there will be vampires flying, but this year it will be in both directions.


Not his fault, he seems to be the product of the Texas public education system.

The weird thing (other than the war affects your life in no tangible way, whatsoever) is that you didn't actually articulate a single original opinion in your post. Its just a mishmash of b.s. from propaganda sources that already resonated with your brain. You're basically a human zombie tentacle of a Russian propaganda botnet. You believe you have free will and your own opinions, but your words suggest otherwise.

At this point I think putin is mostly hot air when comes to the possibility of using nuclear weaponry against Ukraine, to be honest. If he does it would only be a sign of his despair to continue to hold onto power, as he is getting humiliated by each year that passes by and has not been able to take over Ukraine as he expected.
As it stands today, Russia is hoping for Trump to pressure Ukraine to give up and stop the war.

the established power in Russia needs to continuously give this image of having a strong and invincible leader to the rest of the world, specially the west, not winning the war against Ukraine would put the strength of Russia and Putin in question.
The relatively recent visit Putin had in North Korea was a sign of weakness, as well.

Whatever... Using long range missils to attack military bases and ammo deposits in Russia sounds rather fair play to me, keeping in mind the crises against humanity Russia has committed in Ukraine and against civilians.

Just be happy that peaceful-Putin is running Russia. Millions of Russians want Stalin back, because he got things done. Russia would have taken back the rest of its lands from Ukraine long ago if Stalin were still there. And the more that Ukraine attacks into Russia, the more Russians want Stalin back.

If you are smart, you will pray that nothing happens to Putin. Because if something does, Russia just might get Stalin back - Medvedev. If that happens, Ukraine might not last a day. And the UK won't last a week.

The US leaders are betting that Russia won't use nukes. But are they betting on what they will do if Putin does?

There is no escalation. Ukraine was hitting oil facilities, weapons depots, airfields and anything else that they could to prevent Ruzzia from killing Ukrainians, freezing their cities and committing further war crimes. The fact that they are using weapon 1, 2 or 3 does not escalate anything.

I am still absolutely amazed at the narrative by which Ruzzia can celebrate a barrage of khinzals, saheds and all other variety of long range weapons, many of them provided by other nations, that they have employed since the beginning of the war and somehow if Ukraine responds in kind it is "escalation".

There is no escalation, there is just a weapon that will make things harder for Ruzzia and make their aviation much more vulnerable and will waste the flight hours of their airframes faster. Again, if Ruzzia does not like it, they can go back to their original borders.

BTW, Ukraine has shown a great level of restrain in hitting just an ammo depot. I would have gone for the oil exporting terminals, the problem of expensive oil would be Trump's anyway and he is so "shhmaaart" that would solve it in "48 minutes".

Russian inflation and other economic problems are small when compared with what is happening in the West, and has been happening there for a long time, now. But the biggest advantage Russia has is its sophisticated defense system, which protected Russia from by far the largest part of the recent US ATACMS attack by Ukraine.

The below article is extremely eyeopening.


Is This The Secret Reason Why Long-Range Missiles Have Been Fired Deep Into Russian Territory?

---

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/is-this-the-secret-reason-why-long-range-missiles-have-been-fired-deep-into-russian-territory/
When it comes to the world of geopolitics, there is always far more going on than meets the eye.  The long-range missiles that Ukraine is now firing deep into Russian territory are not going to change the course of the war.  But the Russian response to those long-range missiles might.  Hopefully the Russians will show restraint, because they may not even realize that they are being led into a trap.

Just two days after Joe Biden gave the green light, Ukraine fired six ATACMS missiles deep into Russian territory on Tuesday…

Ukraine hit a Russian weapons arsenal with US-made ATACMS missiles that it fired across the border for the first time, according to two US officials, in a major escalation on the 1,000th day of war.

The attack comes just two days after the Biden administration gave Kyiv the green light to use the longer-range American weapons against targets inside Russia.

...

---