Footage of the use in Ukraine of the Russian missile and bomb complex "Grom" has been published. The complex is produced by the Tactical Missiles Corporation; we previously showed this military plant. At the moment, there is not a single video with real missiles and bombs of the "Grom" complex. It is known that the missile system is guided by GPS, it is based on the Kh-38 multi-purpose missile and can hit targets at a distance of up to 120 km. The complex is used from Su-34 and Mig-35 aircraft, as well as from the S-70 Okhotnik UAV. The mass of the missile warhead is from 315 to 480 kilograms. The video shows a missile from the Grom complex hitting a temporary residence of Ukrainian military personnel.
Ukraine - Russia Conflict
- Thread starter randomradio
- Start date
A crime against humanity is when you deliberately target civilians. Building bunkers under hospitals is a crime against humanity.
Saddam Hussein in 1990 when he invaded Kuwait and every time he fired on aircraft enforcing the no-fly zone after that, or tortured and killed his own civilians.
A very interesting document
Que pense l’armée russe de sa guerre en Ukraine ?
Critiques, recommandations, adaptations
Which I have translated
What does the Russian army think of its war in Ukraine?
Reviews, recommendations and adaptations
Air forces:
Que pense l’armée russe de sa guerre en Ukraine ?
Critiques, recommandations, adaptations
Which I have translated
What does the Russian army think of its war in Ukraine?
Reviews, recommendations and adaptations
- Observation of the failure of intelligence prior to the WHO, but also of the dissuasion phase prior to it due to a lack of coherence (not the most interesting part).
- Importance of knowledge of friendly and enemy factors, but also of the cohesion of the battlegroups (criticism of the notion of the GTIA de circonstance).
- Comparison with Operation Danube in Czechoslovakia in 1968 (the model sought in February 22) and the failure in Finland in 1939 (the reality of what happened).
- Recognition of the vulnerability of airborne forces, the importance of cunning and the dispersal of forces in mobile phases.
- Search for firepower in confrontation phases, in particular through the precision of weapons combined with ISR capabilities: difficulty in neutralising mobile targets such as HIMARS and therefore recourse to decoys and protection of key capabilities. Mention was made of the Krasnopol D with a range of 43km using the Msta S or of a shell with radio guidance to regulate artillery fire. The problem of training personnel in this more modern equipment.
- Need for preparation for urban combat and localisation resources adapted to this environment.
- The need for smaller, more agile units operating as part of a network, with more realistic training. Importance of pre-contact intelligence and surprise.
- In terms of defence, static defence was abandoned, but efforts were made to conserve key areas (probably the reason for reported counter-attacks) and to disperse forces.
- The search for mathematization is always present: from geopolitical intelligence to unit capacity, Russian-Soviet military culture dreams of being able to model everything in order to overcome human imprecision and choose the right modes of action before combat, a kind of 'military materialism'.
Air forces:
- The crucial role of drones. Vulnerability of TB2-type UAVs to ASW, the importance of massive use (i.e. inexpensive UAVs) and of having a full range of capabilities (including logistical cargo).
- As a corollary, the importance of the LAD (integrating various capabilities including GE and DSA missile, gun, laser or microwave) in particular against small UAVs.
- Debate between an almost NATO-like vision (the initial use of overwhelming air power in the depths of the battle makes it possible to win the war with almost no need to engage ground forces) of certain Russian officers and the observation by others of the inevitability of recourse to ground engagement and the vulnerability of air forces in the face of a solid DSA.
- The lack of aerospace ISR resources.
- Awareness of the economic need for rationalisation.
- The importance of soldiers' morale, which was based not only on patriotic commitment but also on their preparation for combat: the case of the initial invasion was cited (psychological, material and intelligence unpreparedness). Importance of the "home front".
- Acute awareness of the waste and shortage of human and material resources that are difficult to regenerate in a difficult context (sanctions, etc.), with a tension between the search for a technological solution or, on the contrary, a rustic approach.
- Some emphasised the need to make the population feel good, while others accepted the need to 'terrorise' them.
BS. You don't use guided weapons to target civilians. This is the payload you would use for killing civilians, you'd drop this on a highly populated area:
or this:
The figure of 10,000 is also ridiculous. The fact it's comparable to the number killed in the Ukraine War only proves that. A few fighter sorties per day for 30 days with guided bombs doesn't give 10,000 civilian deaths, not even if you were aiming for them. During WWII, 1600 heavy bombers carrying 10 tons of unguided bombs each flattened an entire city and that only killed 10,000 people, so don't quote me shite from the mouth of terrorists.
I am and I've given you the answer, it started in 1990 and was never ended properly.
Iraq started it, and I was supporting the side that didn't use cyclosarin nerve agent on civilians.
This is why you're hated on twitter, false equivalency and willingness to believe garbage.
Last edited:
You are experiencing moral delusion and denials. Realpolitik is based on self-interest and biases, not some morality. That's just a self-fulfilling narrative for the masses.
Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction or launch any attacks against your allies. The reality is that you deceived yourself into believing these things, similar to how Putin deceived himself about NATO's encroachment on Russia's sphere of influence.
Putin started Ukraine war and west started Iraq war for similar reason. Who started the war argument wont work.
Nope, they are doing it. Their politicians even talking about dropping nuclear publicly.
You just don't like the fact that the moral argument fits in this case, so instead of acknowledging it, you're blabbering about realpolitik and moral delusion like that bow-tie-wearing clown on RT's Cross Talk. Try and compare Iraq to Ukraine all you like, but it will never be the same in any regard. Iraq was not annexed, Saddam Hussein was a mass-murdering war criminal.
The solution at the end of the 1991 war was not a solution. It required a constant no fly zone whereby Saddam was firing at US jets, it required sanctions to keep Saddam in check that were also killing Iraqi civilians (on top of Saddam's killing) and that was driving recruitment for Al Quaeda. It was like imposing harsh restrictions on society so that Charles Manson could walk the streets. The correct thing to do was take Charles Manson/Saddam Hussein off the streets.
Ukraine hadn't previously invaded their neighbour, used nerve agent on civilians and breached UN sanctions, so your shit analogy won't work.
By 'politicians' you mean one lunatic who has since been suspended as a result.
'Wholly unacceptable': US slams Israeli minister's nuclear threats on Gaza
'It is important for all sides of this conflict to refrain from hateful rhetoric,' says State Dept. - Anadolu Ajansı
www.aa.com.tr
How many times have Russian MPs and pundits talked about using nuclear weapons in Ukraine without any reprimand?
May 24, 2022 Russia-Ukraine news
President Joe Biden told the Quad Summit in Tokyo the world is "navigating a dark hour in our shared history" and that President Vladimir Putin is "trying to extinguish a culture," pointing to Russia's targeting of schools, churches and museums.
The Fourteen Facts about US Aid to Ukraine
View PDF Since Russia invaded Ukraine for the second time in eight years, Russian troops have ravaged Ukraine’s cities, raped its women, and stolen its children. Russian missiles and Iranian drones strike Ukrainian cities daily, often hitting civilian targets. Russia is the aggressor. Ukraine is...
Fact: The US is not writing “blank checks” to Ukraine, and most of the money allocated to help Ukraine never leaves the US.
Fact: There has never been more accountability for US military assistance than what is available for Ukraine aid.
Fact: Europe has spent more than the US on Ukraine aid.
Fact: European stability, which Russia is trying to undermine, affects the American worker.
etc.
all this ranting about how costly this war supposedly is for the USA is bullshit propagated by Kremlin shills. Reality is that it costs basically nothing to US. They've send old military equipment they don't need anymore or that was going to be decommissioned, and then mark it as a contribution equal to the value of the same materiel but brand new. In truth, they've actually saving money because decommissioning military materiel is expensive, much more expensive than shipping it abroad.
You cannot annex a nation half a world apart.
That was never an option. Even occupation dont work even in afghanistan.There is no moral higher ground there.
From WMD now its "we didnt finish 91 war properly" thus we will make up a story and invade and kill half a million civilians. But, thats not "crime against humanity" it was a misunderstanding.
Didnt have WMD either. It fits perfectly, imagined threats.
We just "allegedly" did a hit on canada civilian and breached western sanctions buying oil. Does that mean war with India ?. You can wish but thats not how the world works.
Correct, now you get how the threat is equal. Difference is type of political system. Democratic system have checks and balances you cant expect the same from other systems.
Damn! @BMD is still holding the UkroNazi flag high, while they are getting clobbered in real life by Vlad's forces. Try hard dude, try hard...
Sure you can, as an Indian you should know this.You cannot annex a nation half a world apart.
Sure there is. One is liberation, the other is theft.
Lots of good reasons to get rid of Saddam and
Wow, so intelligence made a mistake, based on all the people he'd gassed in the past. So what? Would it have been okay to leave Hitler in charge of Germany under sanctions after WWII? The very idea of it is ridiculous, same deal with Saddam and Iraq.
The termination of the 1991 war was contingent on Saddam abiding by those sanctions. He broke them and they weren't working very fairly or favourably anyway.
No they are not doing it. We heard the same from Russia about Donetsk and even today Donetsk is much less damaged than Bakhmut, Mariupol or Avdiivka.