INF Treaty Violation?

ugly

LE
Moderator
Old maybe but very expensive and didn't work, best of all tracked onto the VIP bleachers whilst live. A little career limiting!
 
D

Deleted 24582

Guest
Ha! And what if the war will started earlier?
MGM-140 ATACMS - Wikipedia

Which is why we need a replacement for it. If we can kill your Air Defense assets and other targets from much further away it will greatly help the fly boys. Hell if we can kill your Air Force on the ground it will make things that much easier. All we really need to do is get the rest of NATO to sign up for HIMARS, and the precision strike missile and that will help spend you folks into oblivion.
 

Grey Fox

*Russian Troll*
Ok. Even if the missiles are not hacked, HMNB Clyde (with at least two subs) will be eliminated before Brits will understood that war is already in the hot stage. So, they have one or two subs in the well known areas of the Ocean (with previously deployed Poseydons and ambushing Submarines). How many missiles they will able to launch before being eliminated? Hardly more than a half (even if they will not be eliminated before launch). How many warheads will be intercepted by Russian ABD?
So, in the most optimistic (for the UK) scenario cost of Russian agression is one-two cities (like St. Petersburg or Vladivostok) devastated with half of its population killed&wounded. In the most pessimistic scenario the UK can't hurt Russia at all.
 

Grey Fox

*Russian Troll*
MGM-140 ATACMS - Wikipedia

Which is why we need a replacement for it. If we can kill your Air Defense assets and other targets from much further away it will greatly help the fly boys. Hell if we can kill your Air Force on the ground it will make things that much easier. All we really need to do is get the rest of NATO to sign up for HIMARS, and the precision strike missile and that will help spend you folks into oblivion.
Ha! How many Russian airbases and SAM sites are concentrated in 160 km from the border? And yes, Land Caliber have range 2600 km. Who have more chances to burn out enemies airfields, SAM-sites, missiles bases and so on by the sudden strike?
 
D

Deleted 24582

Guest
Ok. Even if the missiles are not hacked, HMNB Clyde (with at least two subs) will be eliminated before Brits will understood that war is already in the hot stage. So, they have one or two subs in the well known areas of the Ocean (with previously deployed Poseydons and ambushing Submarines). How many missiles they will able to launch before being eliminated? Hardly more than a half (even if they will not be eliminated before launch). How many warheads will be intercepted by Russian ABD?
So, in the most optimistic (for the UK) scenario cost of Russian agression is one-two cities (like St. Petersburg or Vladivostok) devastated with half of its population killed&wounded. In the most pessimistic scenario the UK can't hurt Russia at all.
However what you seem to not be understanding, is that If the Brits are launching at you we will be to. They are the unofficial 4th leg of the Triad....

Here is the problem with Russian logic, you are trying to wargame the exhcange of Strategic Nuclear weapons. Which in reality the only winners will be those that are vaporized instantly and don’t suffer a prolonged death.
 
D

Deleted 24582

Guest
Ha! How many Russian airbases and SAM sites are concentrated in 160 km from the border? And yes, Land Caliber have range 2600 km. Who have more chances to burn out enemies airfields, SAM-sites, missiles bases and so on by the sudden strike?
The PSM was only limtited by the INF treaty. If we can get a missile with a range of 500 plus miles, and launching from the Baltic states. Quite a bit of your military infrastructure will be under the gun. HIMARS is a mobile platform and with two shots per launcher a battalion can “**** some shit up”.
 

Grey Fox

*Russian Troll*
The PSM was only limtited by the INF treaty. If we can get a missile with a range of 500 plus miles, and launching from the Baltic states. Quite a bit of your military infrastructure will be under the gun. HIMARS is a mobile platform and with two shots per launcher a battalion can “**** some shit up”.
He-he-he. Bases in the Baltic are just a good targets and 'fish in the barrel'. They will be eliminated before you understoid that the war is already in the hot stage. And even if you'll try to play 'sudden strike' - starting missiles will be eliminated by local AAD, and then bases will ve be nuked in first minutes by artillery. Even if some of you missiles will hit their targets (I very doubt in it) it will be almost useless without nuclear warheads.
 
D

Deleted 24582

Guest
He-he-he. Bases in the Baltic are just a good targets and 'fish in the barrel'. They will be eliminated before you understoid that the war is already in the hot stage. And even if you'll try to play 'sudden strike' - starting missiles will be eliminated by local AAD, and then bases will ve be nuked in first minutes by artillery. Even if some of you missiles will hit their targets (I very doubt in it) it will be almost useless without nuclear warheads.
You have to stop with the propaganda and think for yourself. We don't need to compensate for our lack of precision based weapons with tactical nukes. You folks do. Your Senior leadership is terrified of our precision weapons. We have the ISR platforms to find your assets, and if we can find it we can kill it. Having a weapon that can reach out and touch your forces in the "Motherland" will make it more a nightmare for your side and expensive to counter. Combined with other assets, you won't exactly remain unscathed. The HIMARS is a very low tech cheap solution, in comparison to say the F-35 or Eurofighter.

Poland to purchase 20 M142 HIMARS rocket launcher systems from U.S. | December 2018 Global Defense Security army news industry | Defense Security global news industry army 2018 | Archive News year

20 platforms and all the kit to go with it for 655 million.
 

Grey Fox

*Russian Troll*
You have to stop with the propaganda and think for yourself. We don't need to compensate for our lack of precision based weapons with tactical nukes. You folks do. Your Senior leadership is terrified of our precision weapons. We have the ISR platforms to find your assets, and if we can find it we can kill it. Having a weapon that can reach out and touch your forces in the "Motherland" will make it more a nightmare for your side and expensive to counter. Combined with other assets, you won't exactly remain unscathed. The HIMARS is a very low tech cheap solution, in comparison to say the F-35 or Eurofighter.

Poland to purchase 20 M142 HIMARS rocket launcher systems from U.S. | December 2018 Global Defense Security army news industry | Defense Security global news industry army 2018 | Archive News year

20 platforms and all the kit to go with it for 655 million.
He-he-he. Even Belorussia with her 36 "Smerch" system is much stronger. (Say nothing about 'Iskanders', new 'Tornados', old 'Uragans', perspective 'Aquilons', land Calibers and Zircons, Anchars and so on...)
 

Grey Fox

*Russian Troll*
However what you seem to not be understanding, is that If the Brits are launching at you we will be to. They are the unofficial 4th leg of the Triad....
And there is the 5th leg of Pizdetz.

Coming soon...

Here is the problem with Russian logic, you are trying to wargame the exhcange of Strategic Nuclear weapons. Which in reality the only winners will be those that are vaporized instantly and don’t suffer a prolonged death.
It is not 'reality', it is just your nuclephobia.
And yes, we remeber it from 'Treasure Island' ( @terminal , add it to your list of interesting facts, Russians are fond of Stivenson, too)

"Before an hour's out, you'll be laughing on the other side of your faces. Them that die'll be the lucky ones."

Do you remember what has happened later?
(English subtitles aviable)
 

Grey Fox

*Russian Troll*
Can a passing Moderator please come and take this packet of crayons away?
Sure you can. There is a "report" button. May be, it is exactly what you should to do, if you want to stop even unofficial dialogue about INF treaty. But then... Then you will discuss about 'nuclear race' only with our Septic friends
 

Grey Fox

*Russian Troll*
So, here is a question, what the UK can do for the nuclear race? New missiles, new nukes, new tanks, what?
 

Grey Fox

*Russian Troll*
You have to stop with the propaganda and think for yourself. We don't need to compensate for our lack of precision based weapons with tactical nukes.
Ha! Do you remember your shameful strike at Shayrat 7 April, 2017? 59 cruise missiles, two soldiers were killed, few barns were damaged and few aircrafts were burned. Flights were resumed few hours later.
If it was one missile with a nuclear warhead - all base was completely demolished. If this missile was hypersonic - enemies has no time for evacuation.
Think about it.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
CaptainCod The Training Wing 19
B Infantry 10
P The Other Half 3

Latest Threads

Top