Why hasnt Ukraine attacked Russia?

Status
Not open for further replies.

mstateglfr

Well-known member
Feb 24, 2008
13,477
3,412
113
Hopefully this can stay conversational and beneficial. It is about a current global event and is just discussing assumed military strategy. It does not need to discuss anything controversial on the domestic front.


Ukraine didnt wipe out the Russian convoy that basically sat and didnt move for days. Select parts have been attacked, but its 40mi of convoy still. Why not wipe it out? I have read that doing so would eliminate a route into the capital for Ukrainian supplies, but no supplies are going to come down that road as it is since there are Russian tanks and whatnot.

Why not go bomb Russian **** over in Russia? Does Ukraine think that would poke the bear even more? Does Ukraine think attacking Russia would in part justify Russia's invasion? Does Ukraine want to save its capabilities for one big attempt to keep the capital from falling to Russia?
 

SirBarksalot

Active member
May 28, 2007
2,948
246
63
Hopefully this can stay conversational and beneficial. It is about a current global event and is just discussing assumed military strategy. It does not need to discuss anything controversial on the domestic front.


Ukraine didnt wipe out the Russian convoy that basically sat and didnt move for days. Select parts have been attacked, but its 40mi of convoy still. Why not wipe it out? I have read that doing so would eliminate a route into the capital for Ukrainian supplies, but no supplies are going to come down that road as it is since there are Russian tanks and whatnot.

Why not go bomb Russian **** over in Russia? Does Ukraine think that would poke the bear even more? Does Ukraine think attacking Russia would in part justify Russia's invasion? Does Ukraine want to save its capabilities for one big attempt to keep the capital from falling to Russia?

Want to pull some RE Lee **** huh?

I think they have their hands full with what they’ve got defending their own country.
 

aTotal360

Well-known member
Nov 12, 2009
18,780
7,568
113
Do they have the resources to attack Russia? Like SirBark said, they sorta have their hands full.
 

mstateglfr

Well-known member
Feb 24, 2008
13,477
3,412
113
Want to pull some RE Lee **** huh?

I think they have their hands full with what they’ve got defending their own country.

Do they have the resources to attack Russia? Like SirBark said, they sorta have their hands full.

I am not wanting anything here, just curious if anyone has read/listened to reasons for why this hasnt happened.
If they have their hands full as is, ok then.
If they chose to not bomb Russia because their air capabilities are vastly inferior and therefore they have allocated resources elsewhere, ok then.
They have drones and reportedly just got more this past weekend. It is just interesting that everything has been on Ukrainian soil so far. I am not suggesting Ukraine send troops on the ground into Russia, to be clear. Just asking questions.

The convoy has obviously been attacked here and there, but it has been relatively limited and selective.
https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1500914891166785538?s=20&t=jTa09rCqOFXg4JeMIQ5jZA
https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1500915958080282627?s=20&t=jTa09rCqOFXg4JeMIQ5jZA
https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1500942046009438208?s=20&t=jTa09rCqOFXg4JeMIQ5jZA
https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1500912984302010374?s=20&t=jTa09rCqOFXg4JeMIQ5jZA
 

thekimmer

Well-known member
Aug 30, 2012
7,194
1,052
113
Think about that for a minute.....

Hopefully this can stay conversational and beneficial. It is about a current global event and is just discussing assumed military strategy. It does not need to discuss anything controversial on the domestic front.


Ukraine didnt wipe out the Russian convoy that basically sat and didnt move for days. Select parts have been attacked, but its 40mi of convoy still. Why not wipe it out? I have read that doing so would eliminate a route into the capital for Ukrainian supplies, but no supplies are going to come down that road as it is since there are Russian tanks and whatnot.

Why not go bomb Russian **** over in Russia? Does Ukraine think that would poke the bear even more? Does Ukraine think attacking Russia would in part justify Russia's invasion? Does Ukraine want to save its capabilities for one big attempt to keep the capital from falling to Russia?

Ukraine is being invaded by a significantly stronger foreign army. It takes everything they have to defend their home and try to stay alive. They can't spare any forces to counter invade the other country. Plus, if they did it would give the invaders an excuse to be even more ruthless. It would be like a guy 5'10" 160 lb trying to hold his own in a fight against a 6'3" 250 lbs brute and while the little guy is getting pummeled he decides to go over and kick the dude's brother in the shin.

It might make you feel better for a few moments but the end result is a worse *** whipping.
 
Last edited:

Bill Shankly

New member
Nov 27, 2020
2,095
0
0
Hopefully this can stay conversational and beneficial. It is about a current global event and is just discussing assumed military strategy. It does not need to discuss anything controversial on the domestic front.


Ukraine didnt wipe out the Russian convoy that basically sat and didnt move for days. Select parts have been attacked, but its 40mi of convoy still. Why not wipe it out? I have read that doing so would eliminate a route into the capital for Ukrainian supplies, but no supplies are going to come down that road as it is since there are Russian tanks and whatnot.

Why not go bomb Russian **** over in Russia? Does Ukraine think that would poke the bear even more? Does Ukraine think attacking Russia would in part justify Russia's invasion? Does Ukraine want to save its capabilities for one big attempt to keep the capital from falling to Russia?
They don't have the numbers and most likely don't have the capability to go on the offensive. Also, despite the Russians not moving as fast as expected, they are still winning. Ukraine has it's hands full and then some just doing what it is doing.
 

GloryDawg

Well-known member
Mar 3, 2005
14,523
5,367
113
I am not wanting anything here, just curious if anyone has read/listened to reasons for why this hasnt happened.
If they have their hands full as is, ok then.
If they chose to not bomb Russia because their air capabilities are vastly inferior and therefore they have allocated resources elsewhere, ok then.
They have drones and reportedly just got more this past weekend. It is just interesting that everything has been on Ukrainian soil so far. I am not suggesting Ukraine send troops on the ground into Russia, to be clear. Just asking questions.

The convoy has obviously been attacked here and there, but it has been relatively limited and selective.
https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1500914891166785538?s=20&t=jTa09rCqOFXg4JeMIQ5jZA
https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1500915958080282627?s=20&t=jTa09rCqOFXg4JeMIQ5jZA
https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1500942046009438208?s=20&t=jTa09rCqOFXg4JeMIQ5jZA
https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1500912984302010374?s=20&t=jTa09rCqOFXg4JeMIQ5jZA

To attack a defending army you need 2-1 odds unless your technology is vastly superior then that's not the case. This invasion has to be one of the worse operational planning by military leaders.
 
Last edited:

thatsbaseball

Well-known member
May 29, 2007
16,641
4,143
113
Numbers

 

archdog

New member
Aug 22, 2012
1,882
0
0
Hopefully this can stay conversational and beneficial. It is about a current global event and is just discussing assumed military strategy. It does not need to discuss anything controversial on the domestic front.


Ukraine didnt wipe out the Russian convoy that basically sat and didnt move for days. Select parts have been attacked, but its 40mi of convoy still. Why not wipe it out? I have read that doing so would eliminate a route into the capital for Ukrainian supplies, but no supplies are going to come down that road as it is since there are Russian tanks and whatnot.

Why not go bomb Russian **** over in Russia? Does Ukraine think that would poke the bear even more? Does Ukraine think attacking Russia would in part justify Russia's invasion? Does Ukraine want to save its capabilities for one big attempt to keep the capital from falling to Russia?

Tough to wipe out when it is covered by anti-aircraft weapons. I agree though, we should have given them 500 predator drones a few months back with some 12 year old Halo players to pilot them.
 

fang

Member
Nov 29, 2010
551
20
18
" Why not wipe it out? "

because they don't control the airspace. S400's are set up and fully operational, about a 400km range so not many required to fully cover all pertinent airspace (and they don't have to be in Ukr). Ukr has been supplied man/pads, either directly (officially) or indirectly (unofficially via re-routing of those supplied to ME 'allies'). They did employ drones initially and there's some video of them being effective but that was short lived due to - Rus establishing control of the airspace.
 

ckDOG

Well-known member
Dec 11, 2007
8,237
2,570
113
Lack of Ukrainian resources and Russian nukes

Let's assume Ukraine had access to long range missiles and bombers and pulled off a raid on Moscow. The only thing keeping Putin then from completely vaporizing Ukraine at that point would be the worry about being downwind. Nukes change everything every time.

Now would the Russian nukes successfully launch and hit targets? At this point I'm skeptical their **** show can pull anything successful off but it's best to assume they can.
 
Aug 22, 2012
2,761
1
31
" Why not wipe it out? "

because they don't control the airspace. S400's are set up and fully operational, about a 400km range so not many required to fully cover all pertinent airspace (and they don't have to be in Ukr). Ukr has been supplied man/pads, either directly (officially) or indirectly (unofficially via re-routing of those supplied to ME 'allies'). They did employ drones initially and there's some video of them being effective but that was short lived due to - Rus establishing control of the airspace.

This right here.

When those overhead pics of the Russian supply convoy came out a bunch of people were like, “wHy dOnt yOu juSt BoMb iT!?!?”

There’s a thing called anti-air defense. Russia has it. This isn’t the first conflict the Russian army has been in for Pete’s sake.

On top of that you need units to “paint” the targets, either from the air or on the ground. It’s not as simple as launching a drone and being done with it.

Also, how could Ukraine support a counter invasion or counter attack? The Russians are having trouble with supply lines and they are a superior force.

And furthermore, even if they could do any of those things, the Russians ability to hit back remotely (and with nuclear weapons) is greater than Ukraine’s.
 

mstateglfr

Well-known member
Feb 24, 2008
13,477
3,412
113
" Why not wipe it out? "

because they don't control the airspace. S400's are set up and fully operational, about a 400km range so not many required to fully cover all pertinent airspace (and they don't have to be in Ukr). Ukr has been supplied man/pads, either directly (officially) or indirectly (unofficially via re-routing of those supplied to ME 'allies'). They did employ drones initially and there's some video of them being effective but that was short lived due to - Rus establishing control of the airspace.

From what I have read, drone use would largely avoid the issue you mention. That is why I brought up 'wiping it out'. I dont mean in the movies where its a carpet of explosions, but it rather more than what we have seen so far.
 

ZombieKissinger

Well-known member
May 29, 2013
3,277
4,094
113
Haven’t read the thread yet, but Ukraine should call it either Operation Ender Wiggin or Rocky Balboa
 

fang

Member
Nov 29, 2010
551
20
18
From what I have read, drone use would largely avoid the issue you mention. That is why I brought up 'wiping it out'. I dont mean in the movies where its a carpet of explosions, but it rather more than what we have seen so far.[/

Drones can be ‘spent’ but you’d prefer to reuse, how many do they have (dunno)? But it’s not so much the drones as it is the human driving it. When you launch, there’s a control signal that’s transmitted, and can be pinpointed as to its location, if you’re not quick or taking ‘other’ measures, hell’s probably inbound. Thus the lack of videos (I’ve only seen one) of convoys getting hit. It’s also hard to tell the difference between Ukr/rus equipment cause they (were) the same stuff…
 

PooPopsBaldHead

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2017
7,972
5,080
113
Nice graphic. Completely misleading though. (Not picking a fight with you thatsbaseball, just giving context.)

It's become painfully obvious how old and ****** the vast majority of Russia's equipment is... I mean like 40+ years old. Those tanks and APC's you see on TV? I've seen them before, its the same exact **** Glory and the boys smoked (See graphic below) back in 1991 when the US and Allies rolled in on Saddam and the 4th largest and powerful military in the world (it's true 700 planes, 6000 tanks, 650K troops, all top of the line Soviet ****.) In Desert Storm the US coalition blew that **** to hell and back on what is now known as the Highway of Death. When we rolled through more than a decade later that **** was still sitting there.

View attachment 24025

It was inferior equipment then and its damn near obsolete now. Most civilians in the US think of our military based on long occupations and fighting insurgents (Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.) Those missions are fools errands. Your only job is to protect yourselves and civilians while hoping not to get blown up by an enemy posing as a farmer in a rice patty or a guy selling electronics at the bazaar. In conventional warfare, we are virtually untouchable.



For as long as I remember I have considered the Russians a worthy adversary. But not anymore. On a neutral battlefield like Ukraine, Russia would last maybe 96 hours before waiving the white flag. It would be a slaughter. Our technology and training is light years ahead. We have 600+ stealth fighters and bombers, they have 10. Our pilots get more than twice the flight hours every year than theirs. Their soldiers are rolling into Ukraine with no GPS (Phones taken away to boot) and are instead using printed out mapquest looking directions. Nearly 20 years ago in Iraq, every US vehicle had a "Blue Force Tracker" a 15" flatscreen (Dawgstudent approved) GPS that had realtime location tracking of every coalition vehicle in country. Any unit could mark suspicious activity or possible ambush/ied locations on the map and every coalition soldier would see it.... These poor bastards are still analog in a digital world.

In the last 30 years Russia has spent a grand total of $1.3 trillion on their military. That's less than 18 months for us. Yes they have 1500 hundred fixed wing military fighters... But how old are they? We are busy retiring our F-15's (which are 104-0 in air to air combat by the way) which are better than 90% of anything they have so we can go to completely stealth fighters. Which are undetectable on radar and would not have to dogfight any Russian aircraft (just fire some missiles at the Russian fighter from 50 miles away and move on) or sweat SAMs. The *** whipping would be so swift and lopsided, the Army and Marines would probably not get involved. We would come in and help rebuild schools and cleanup I guess.

While I am on a roll... To the handful of you bitching about the weakness of the modern soldier or the fact that they're not "masculine" enough... Here's a fact those of you who haven't served might not know. 90% of the military are there to support the 10% who actually fight in combat. Those 90% don't need to be the ultimate badass, they need to be smart, well trained, and mentally tough. It's especially delightful to hear a whole lot of people that have never toed the line themselves talk ****, especially the politicians that get their mouthbreathing constituents riled up. The biggest failure Russia is having revolves around their complete cluster17 of a logistical/support operation. The whole damn lot of them look like a monkey 17ing a football. It's because they have conscripts and dipshits everywhere, no matter how "masculine" they might be, they are not well trained, intelligent, or mentally tough.

They will eventually take out Ukraine military, but at a very high cost. They will never hold the country for more than a month though. No chance. I have seen that shitshow first hand, virtually impossible when you have it together against a marginal insurgency.


Yes they have nukes, but from what I have seen so far half of them would blow up in the silo and the other half would peter out in the Ocean if they were to fire them. Just know that at anytime we want, we could throw their asses right back across that red line. Not advocating for it, but the way the sanctions are hitting it may be safer to fight them conventionally, Putin is going to be very desperate, very soon if he doesn't get an offramp.
 
Last edited:

DesotoCountyDawg

Well-known member
Nov 16, 2005
22,172
9,565
113
What you say about the preparedness of their invasion rings pretty true. Even in Desert Storm with all the logistics in place and months of preparation they had some setbacks simply from a resupply standpoint. If anyone is interested I would recommend the Operations Room YouTube channel and watch his videos on the air war and ground war in Desert Storm.

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLErys4h2oiuyKCuzZhpHhCeRwSoQVEazb
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Get unlimited access today.

Pick the right plan for you.

Already a member? Login