The chance of a nuclear Bomb set off in Europe is very high
I read the town they’ve been scrapping over lately has a salt mine that would be a useful base for equipment immune to HIMARS attacks. Russia hasn’t been engaging in these kind of battles to take small towns throughout the war, it seems to me.
As for air superiority, Russia seems to be able to bomb Ukrainian infrastructure at will 
1 Like
We should. But the numbers I gave (which we don’t know exactly how reliable or true are) was for military only.
But as I mentioned, there are a number of indicators, not just the number of munitions fired.
20,000 artillery shells for Russia per day
7,000 for Ukraine per day in early November report.
this months report states russia has reduced firing rate by 75%. either saving for offensive or just running low.
Mine was from yesterday, I will dig to find the link if you like.
Part of the equation here is Russia is knocking out munitions at a rate that far exceeds the West. For all sorts of reasons, that’s a discussion in and of itself.
russia can’t even figure out how to refuel a tank 10km from their border, imagine they can’t hit the broad side of a barn with shit.
Balancing liberal secular democracy against autocracies that use liberalism against it is tricky.
MSM are the problem? Perhaps to a degree. Prefer autocratic media?
2 Likes
In that case, since the Ukrainians aren’t shelling mother Russia, logic suggests the death toll will be higher on the Ukrainian side
No doubt. Accuracy of munitions and accuracy of intelligence probably skew towards Ukraine thanks to NATO (multiple reports have suggested Russia is firing old North Korean shells), while willingness to fire on civilians gives Putin the death toll advantage
1 Like
For those who do, this story brought to you by TASS:
For those who haven’t been paying attention to where the money comes from:
It would be better to send the Abrams to Poland (they already operate them) and let them send more Leopards.
One step closer to boots on the ground.
I understood that Germany required the US send tanks, politics trumps sense
1 Like
Poland could trade with us first, then we could send the Leopards. Biden could even drive it across the border if necessary 
2 Likes
3 Likes
These tanks are going to make a big difference.
The democratic west are upping the anti each time Putin pushes it. Sensible and logical. They’re gaming the man.
Are they though? Won’t they be vulnerable to the same kind of tactics that have led to heavy Russian tank losses?
I suspect they’re wanted primarily in case a large scale invasion does materialize. They could be very useful then, true.
Russia doesn’t have the western weapons and training there, and these tanks have better armor, but yeah
As was discussed on the discussion thread, a handful of tanks isn’t going to make a difference. But once 100 are sent, more can follow. In addition to the other heavy weapons sent and being sent, one weapon could make the difference in the battle for a strategic victory that wins the war
Next up on the shopping list is gonna be fighter jets (i know they’re already asking)
I’m sure they must have some good infantry-operated anti-tank rocket weapons. It’s not rocket science Back in the day, their RPG was a threat
So they do, with success against the specific incoming tanks (by other operators)
9M133 Kornet - Wikipedia(Russian%3A%20%D0%9A%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%82,the%20Russian%20army%20in%201998.
1 Like
