Poland Accuses Russia Of Shooting Missiles Into It's Territory

I agree with you. But without a "path to win" he will get desperate. And I still believe that if he gets to that point, he'll pop a very small nuke that will have no effects outside of Ukraine in order to intimidate the Ukrainians. The more I thing about that, the more likely I see it. Without any effects outside Ukraine I doubt there would be any NATO response... but just the fact that a nuke was used in a new war sets a terrible precedent for the modern world. He's an old man on a mission to re-establish the Soviet Empire. As he nears his dirt nap, he'll get more and more aggressive in realizing that goal.

 

nah ...that ain't goning to happen...Putin may be off his f**king head but he's not stupid.

 

https://fortune.com/2022/11/04/xi-warns-putin-nuclear-weapons-ukraine-war-red-line/

There would be no nuclear weapons used for many reasons.

- China said that's a red line. So you are risking alienating your one big friend.
- The fallout would drift into Russia
- Putin wants a legacy to be remembered in the same breath as Stahlin or Peter the Great. A nuke would ruin that.
- The chain of command to set off a nuke requires more than just Putin's approval
- 1 nuke in Ukraine wouldn't win him anything.
- using a nuke could likely get him killed internally.
- could draw in NATO which would likely have a more conventional response (not nuclear) would likely sink his new sub and his black fleet.

I'm fairly confindent that the United States NAVY knows exactly where that sub is btw...

 

I believe use of a small nuke would have no reaction from the international community. As long as its effects weren't felt in NATO. We'll see I guess.

 

Nukes come in many sizes, from HUGE to itty-bitty. If Russia used one in Ukraine that was in the itty-bitty category, say .5kt to 1.25 kt (Hiroshima was 15kt), I see no reason for China to care. An airburst which kept the fireball from touching the ground would all but eliminate any significant fallout. I am not familiar enough with Russian politics to know what it would do to his legacy. I see no reason why the Chain of Command wouldn't comply with the use of a tiny nuke. 1 nuke might be the straw that broke the camel's back in discouraging Ukrainian will to continue. I see no reason for a NATO response when nothing effects NATO but the politics.

 

Me too.

From what little I know already, I would guess that if the two explosions were caused by Russian missiles, it was a mistake.

 

If it's the case that Ukraine caused this, you still blame Russia because your argument is basically "He started it!".
FFS, really? You were that kid in school? Teachers in my school never accepted such a remark.

 

Waiting could be a big mistake. And you’re right about Russian apologists. There are a disturbing amount that fall for the Russian state media. They don’t trust our government but they trust a government that has a long history of controlling media, killing political adversaries, and killing journalists

 

There seem to be different scenario's floating.
The first idea was Russia accidentally aimed wrong.
But then there was that idea that Ukraine might have knocked a missile out of the sky with their own crap... but knocked it into Poland.
There is also the idea that Ukraine tried to knock out a missile, failed, and hit Poland instead.

 

Why is waiting a mistake? Jumping the gun would be the biggest mistake. It's absolutely not clear whose missile hit Poland even. While there is no harm to investigate exactly what dropped on Poland and how it get there. That war is totally not going to end today, so there is plenty of time to retaliate if there ever is going to be a need for it.

 

Ya. I don't fault a missle used to defend yourself from an unwarranted aggression. Sorry. If Russia doesn't aggress, this missle doesn't get launched.

Facts.

 

Waiting until Ukraine is wiped out would be a mistake. Allies that are alive and more useful than dead ones. As for the investigation, they can do that but it doesn’t take long to identify a missile make.

 

I don't dispute that if Russia didn't use it's missiles that Ukraine would not have launched it's defense system that highly probably caused this.
I just don't agree that iRussia is to blame, when Ukraine uses a faulty system and/or untrained staff.
Heck, that stuff they use is probably given by a NATO country, and the staff using it is probably trained by NATO... and now NATO ends up with the short straw.
That's part of "crap happens". Facts

 

They are not being wiped out by a long shot. Don't be such a drama queen.

 

That’s the best you got? Even as an insult that was laughable. This must be how you debate… with emotion.

right now Ukraine is the buffer from Russia. I’m sure Poland doesn’t want to be the next buffer.

 

I designed one of the Stinger variants and the JAVELIN (and worked on several others). I used to have the napkin I used to draw up the initial concept of the JAVELIN until some idiot used it to clean up his spilled coffee. So, there is no need to explain the details. As for the S-300 it far exceeds the size and range of a Stinger. It does not possess the precision guidance of the Stinger either. Remember, we are talking Russian design here in 1978. The S-300 is not man launched (obviously) and the lightest variant weighs in excess of 2 tons! Its range is in excess of 100 miles (180 km). Well beyond the range of a Stinger. It does not utilize a shaped charge. It has a proximity detector necessitating a larger blast radius than the Stinger. It's a big beast.

 

Very simple. If Russia doesn't aggress, then Ukraine doesn't launch that missle. For all we know that missle intercepted a Russian missle and both landed in Poland. This collaterol damage is bound to happen. So yes. I blame the side that is perpetuating the aggression.

 

That doesn't mean anything.

Neither does financial corruption in Kiev

 

I think we all can get over being "insulted" of being a drama queen.
And indeed. Ukraine is not being wiped out. If you'd paid any attention you would have came to the conclusion they are still gaining more and more of their country back. Last think I heard is that they retook their last city back that they lost earlier this year. It borders some river, and the Russians retreated not just out of the city across the river, but are already 20 miles behind it. So Ukraine can just cross it at their own leisure. And so the label is just.


And the warzone is like over 1000 miles away from Poland. That's more than Texas is wide where they claim everything it's massively big. Ukraine is bigger. Put some perspective in this.

 

you already said that. It changes nothing what I said.

 

Perfect! It shows Russia is not fighting with Ukraine, only with Ukraines Nazi electricity.

 

That missile is a Russian built missile that Ukraine has used for years as an anti air threat defensive weapon and it appears that it misfired e.g. an equipment failure causing collateral damage.

 

I don't think electrons can be Nazi's .. however, Nazi's can produce electricity .. so I suppose one could claim that Russia was fighitng Nazi's by turning off the lights

 

Exactly. I wasn't comparing Stinger and S300. I was simply making the point that small or large, air defense weapons carry a lot less bang than ground attack weapons. Patriot is the better comparison to S300, although even there, we have transitioned to more precise scheme since adopting the Israeli ARROW guidance system for Patriot PAC-3. Basic Patriot needed this upgrade badly after the "proximity" scheme ended up knocking down a SCUD and killing a hangar full of US medical personnel after the falling debris fell. Now, with the ARROW uprade, the "proximity" has been replaced with "precision".
Say, since you worked on Stinger, did you ever hear of the STPT (Stinger Troop Proficiency Trainer)? I helped design that, although I was really more a MILES guy.

 

I beg to differ Sir!
I think there would be very serious ramifications for Russia and I think that would include western military retaliation and significant ramping up of sanctions. Its a cost/benefit thing...I can't think what possible benefit it would bring Russia based on the force packages they have versus the force packages Ukraine has? If you are thinking they would use it on the battlefield one has to presume there would be some point to it...idk...punching holes in positions or striking accumulations of men or vehicles and using the subsequent "hole" to move through...which is not really the scenarios in play at the moment as the Russians are not bringing coherent structures to bear in their attacks. Tactical nukes don't really do that much in open field manoeuvres; unless they want to strike hardened command structures or logistics depots which tend to be in built up areas. Personally, I can't see what benefit the use of a nuke would be against small concentrations of light forces if the Russians have no real structure behind a strike in order to benefit from that strike? The costs would be disastrous against any perceived benefit