Ukraine

The Polish Prime Minister has now announced the likelihood of an unfortunate accident of Ukrainian missiles launched in defence finding their way over the Polish Border, with no evidence of antagonism aimed at Poland by Russia.

Excellent, I can put the white sheets back on the bed tonight.

That Lat Lon post is interesting – and yes I’ve checked the actual numbers. Hell of a coincidence otherwise.

What number are you referring to slowoldchap? (edited: I see the data input is wrong) They are raring to go you know ...

The Polish Prime Minister has now announced the likelihood of an unfortunate accident of Ukrainian missiles launched in defence finding their way over the Polish Border, with no evidence of antagonism aimed at Poland by Russia.

Is he changing the information? I bet he is raring to go.

With the propaganda in full swing on both sides I am not surprised if a single misfired missile could trigger WWIII.

Oh calm yerself 😆 To think NATO or the US and its allies would launch a full spread of nuclear missiles at Russia knowing Russia would respond in kind, is just beyond fantasy.

Besides, the Daily Mail are suggesting it was fired by the Ukraine, so it must be true

I think NATO are very keen to play this down publicly, no matter what evidence the6 have. Conversations directly with Russia may have been somewhat different….

It’s almost certainly just a missile that suffered a failure of the guidance system. It wasn’t fired from Russian territory. It may have been fired from Belarus at a Ukrainian target, it may have been fired by Ukraine as an anti-missile weapon. The idea that NATO is going to go to war over a single missile that landed miles from any actual target, almost certainly by accident, is just silly.

Biden certainly chose his words carefully... (embarrassingly almost)

As mentioned above NATO has multiple escalation steps, and Russia really, really doesn’t want NATO any more involved than it already is..

What "Russia" wants or doesn't seems to have little bearing on Putin.

Nato are playing it down, but Zelensky is trying his best to maintain blame on Russia.

Of course, he wants Nato involved, and perhaps isn’t considering the big picture.

Thank god for Guardian and Biden admin for the clarification.

You're absolutely right. We should check in with Breitbart, Uncle WooWoo, the Leyton Orient supporters' forum and that well known expert @GaryBrexit42917 on twitter for the full story.

I am not surprised if a single misfired missile could trigger WWIII.

Possibly one of those WW2 era guided missiles that you suggested might have been launched yesterday?

Anyway, there have been several incidents during the Cold War whereby aircraft and missiles have strayed into hostile territory, the result usually involved a lot of diplomatic toing and froing to mollify the injured party. Two notable incidents are linked below:

In 1989 a Soviet Mig-23 crashed in Belgium killing one person on the ground. The pilot had ejected over Poland and the errant Mig continued on it's journey until it ran out of fuel.

In 1966 a Yak-28 strayed into West-German airspace before crashing.

What was Gary’s assessment btw?

There’s this shoot down as well from the height of the Cold War

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/soviets-shoot-down-u-s-jet

What was Gary’s assessment btw?

Illegal immigrants and Brussels. Probably.

Anyway, there have been several incidents during the Cold War whereby

and as someone pointed out earlier an incident where a hungry Ostrich got shot leading to WW I (if only they'd had the foresight to call it that ?)

or as is often said (apparently) the cause of the Great War was noone trying hard enough not to have one?

Putin is either insane or doing a good impersonation of insane?
Khrushchev through Gorbachev seem retrospectively to have been somewhat more stable?

As before, the purported S-300 is used by both Russia and Ukraine. Zelenskiy refutes Polish claims that the missile was fired by Ukraine.

Has Ukraine been stitched up here, and it was a Russian missile that Nato are saying is Ukrainian to avoid having to act?

Or did Ukraine fire it on purpose to bring Nato into it?

We still don't know the missile's exact provenance as yet.

In 1989 a Soviet Mig-23 crashed in Belgium killing one person on the ground. The pilot had ejected over Poland and the errant Mig continued on it’s journey until it ran out of fuel.

In 1966 a Yak-28 strayed into West-German airspace before crashing.

!966 - the USA dropped four nuclear bombs of Spain 🙂

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1966_Palomares_B-52_crash

Has Ukraine been stitched up here, and it was a Russian missile that Nato are saying is Ukrainian to avoid having to act?

Or did Ukraine fire it on purpose to bring Nato into it?

I had both of these on my mind this afternoon. This I guess is why Ukraine are demanding access to the site - what what if THEY have an agenda.... aargh! I imagine NATO won't let them in until they can display a Radar / Sat image of the trajectory.

Let's not forget the quality of ageing Russian-made kit. There are plenty of examples of misfires:
Russian Pantsir (SA22-Greyhound) misfire https://twitter.com/i/status/1574859433192132617
Russian Kalibr cruise missile misfire

Russian S400 misfire https://crooksandliars.com/cltv/2022/06/russian-missile-defense-system-blows

Ignorant question - with all the "eyes on the skies" in the region, will there be a proper record of the missiles path?

Unlikely, you don't hand propaganda victories to the opposition. But in all fairness to the Ukraine they can be forgiven as they acted properly in launching an intercept missile, its just unfortunate as to the final result.

with all the “eyes on the skies” in the region, will there be a proper record of the missiles path?

I would assume yes but anyone qualified to answer the question probably has been given paperwork telling them they aint allowed to. No point either in it being officially announced.

Ultimately it is the Russians fault. The Ukrainians wouldnt have launched the faulty AA missile if the Russians hadnt been launching missiles at them.

Has Ukraine been stitched up here, and it was a Russian missile that Nato are saying is Ukrainian to avoid having to act?
Or did Ukraine fire it on purpose to bring Nato into it?

I had both of these on my mind this afternoon. This I guess is why Ukraine are demanding access to the site – what what if THEY have an agenda…. aargh! I imagine NATO won’t let them in until they can display a Radar / Sat image of the trajectory.

Both are possible but escalating it will only lead to the inevitable because the Poles are raring to go probably due to the WWII betrayal. Biden admin on the other hand is still on a shaky grounds at home and one wrong move means they would be out in the cold for a long time.

because the Poles are raring to go probably due to the WWII betrayal.

They are really not.  The Poles are strong supporters of Ukraine, because they know fine well that they could be next in Moscow's cross hairs if Putin is successful there. They know Russia views them, like all former Soviet satellites close to EU/NATO with a toxic mix of envy,  disdain, a misplaced superiority complex and territorial ambition.

So yes, they will defend themselves vigorously if attacked, but they are not looking for war. Do you seriously think any of Russia's neighbours is looking at the death, destruction of infrastructure, war crimes, refugees caused by Russia in Ukraine and thinking 'I fancy some of that'?

The Polish president has acknowledged that this was probably not a Russian attack. Not the actions of someone wanting to up the ante or invoke article 5.

Meanwhile, now that we can be reasonably assured that we’re not going to wake up in the middle of WW3, it seems that Russia’s chain smoking and H&S lax servicemen have been flicking their dog ends in the wrong direction. Again.

This time it’s the airfield at Dzhankoy in the Crimea, where a number of SU25 and SU34 planes have apparently been lit up.

Tsk. Those scallawags and their smoking. When will the ever learn..

Russian regional mobilisation senior officer Colonel Roman Malyk committed suicide in October
Another senior mobilisation officer, Colonel Vadim Boyko, shot himself yesterday, five rounds and four pistols were found with his body, it's reported as suicide...
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/vadim-boyko-mystery-as-putins-military-crony-found-shot-dead/

Both are possible but escalating it will only lead to the inevitable because the Poles are raring to go probably due to the WWII betrayal.

Possible in the same way I might win the lottery at the weekend. Plausible, I don't think so. And the Poles aren't raring to go they're just not being cowed into silence by a Russian dictator's imperialist ambitions as they might have been without having the backing of NATO.

Biden admin on the other hand is still on a shaky grounds at home and one wrong move means they would be out in the cold for a long time.

Sure, if jumping the gun and starting WW3 counts as a wrong move, we'd all be out in the cold of a nuclear winter then though. No doubt Biden's got a lot to worry about domestically before 2024 but I don't think his decision making on Ukraine is driven by opinion polls in the US nor is it likely that election will be influenced much by what happens in Ukraine (assuming the WW3 scenario doesn't come to pass)

Post Midterms Biden has quite a decent window to “sort” this before 2024.

I read somewhere that this all going to plan for the Americans in that the Russian army and government are slowly being boiled, like the frog. But the risk is anything sudden or unexpected will drastically change the plan. The US and NATO are quite content to keep simmering albeit at the expense of Ukraine.

I read somewhere that this all going to plan for the Americans in that the Russian army and government are slowly being boiled, like the frog. But the risk is anything sudden or unexpected will drastically change the plan. The US and NATO are quite content to keep simmering albeit at the expense of Ukraine.

This is not a U.S. plan. Russia is just utterly incompetent.

I read somewhere that this all going to plan for the Americans

Yes, destroying the bread basket of Europe - and beyond - and seeing the world economy go tits up as a result has got the Americans rubbing their hands with glee that their cunning masterplan has worked

The US and NATO are quite content to keep simmering albeit at the expense of Ukraine.

I agree with NATO support for Ukraine, and I don't mean to lead the thread off topic, but I think you're right. Apart from the death and destruction in Ukraine, humans are probably doomed unless we get rid of nationalist dominance as an aspiration. US, China, Iran, Russia, etc, believe that their own citizens will benefit if they can subdue rival nations. We need a comet heading towards us or something to wake up and realise we can't afford it as a species. Covid wasn't enough, the timescale for global warming is too long compared to political careers, and Brexit illustrates how nationalism works in a democracy.

This is the article:
Frog boiling

Yes, destroying the bread basket of Europe – and beyond – and seeing the world economy go tits up as a result has got the Americans rubbing their hands with glee that their cunning masterplan has worked

The article linked to doesn’t refer to destroying the breadbasket of Europe and beyond as part of some western plan, but rather the response to Russias invasion of Ukraine. For which, it would be insane for their to be no plan.

I don’t think Caher is saying the war is happening because of a western plan, but there is a plan of support by the west as a response. Is that about right @caher ?

I think the motivation for US and other western support to Ukraine is a mix of altruism/doing the right thing and pragmatism/selfishness.  There was genuine shock at what Russia did. A European democratic* state being invaded by a belligerent, bullying, autocratic neighbour feels like something which had been consigned to history. I do think that near universal support for military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine in the West is genuine, heartfelt and not totally motivated by self interest.

However, it also gives the US/Western democracies an opportunity to degrade Russia's power and influence.  They have run riot in recent years, interfering in elections, waging cyber warfare, carrying out chemical warfare attacks and assassinations in Western nations and generally being a malign, destabilising influence.  I'm sure there is a view that anything which weakens the leadership, undermines their global image or reputation for military competence strengthens the West.  I'd hope that wouldn't include a wish for the war to drag on to attrit RF forces at Ukraine's expense, but I'm not entirely convinced.

I also think there is a danger that Russia's grievances and humiliation if Ukraine 'wins' will fester and mutate.  Especially if, as has been agreed, they have to pay massive reparations. I think some kind of democratic revolution is highly unlikely.  If Putin is replaced, it's likely to be by some other ultranationalist headbanger. They will abandon any remaining pretence of democracy and looking outwards and become like North Korea in Europe, but with a hell of a lot more Nukes.  All very depressing.  I still absolutely support Ukraine in this, I just don't see any kind of rosy future when the current conflict ends.

*I know Ukraine's democracy is new and far from perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than what passes for 'democracy' in the Russian federation.

I don’t think Caher is saying the war is happening because of a western plan, but there is a plan of support by the west as a response. Is that about right

That's exactly how I interpreted it. Trying to introduce a different perspective.
It was another poster who jumped to that conclusion.
Sometimes the reaction of a few on here make some threads quite a hostile place to post.

It's not like Russia has any western facing city's either and in the outlands it's even worse abandoned for corruption and greed.
I cannot see any real appetite for change like we see in Hong Kong or currently Iran.
They will go inwards looking and blame any one but themselves or Putin the normal folk will get ground to mush

Sometimes the reaction of a few on here make some threads quite a hostile place to post.

Freedom of speech, thought, idea. Some just dont get it.

We’re already seeing a number of commentators asking whether Zelenskiy can be trusted following reports of the S-300 missile landing in Poland. Predictably, these voices are closely associated with the hard right of US political punditry, some making fanciful allegations of money-laundering. And no, I won’t link their tweets here, mostly because they’re irredeemable scumbags.

TBH’s I don’t agree that US involvement in Ukraine is down to altruism - Putin’s Russia has made a habit of courting extremists. The fact that the Russian military has inflicted a colossal blunder upon itself is arguably too good an opportunity to miss. We’re seeing the sort of authoritarian quasi-democracy that many on the hard-right of politics in the US and Europe aspire to follow have its’ shorts whipped down in full view.

We’re seeing an authoritarian regime mired in staggering degrees of corruption unable to extricate itself from a situation of its’ own making. The decision making processes are ossified - there’s no means for dissenting voices to hold leadership to account. Russia isn’t on the brink of revolution (yet), but tens of thousands of Russian men between the ages of 18 and 65(!) from Russia’s provinces are being used as cannon fodder. Even if Putin sues for peace tomorrow, the social fallout in Russia will be felt for decades yet.

Even if Putin sues for peace tomorrow, the social fallout in Russia will be felt for decades yet.

It will, but there will be zero acceptance of responsibility for any of it by Russia. It will be the fault of Ukrainian Nazis, NATO, the EU, the treacherous former republics, Russian opposition parties etc. Resentment, misplaced grievance and exceptionalism fed by state controlled media will fester and make the country an even more toxic basket case than it is now.  They will be broke, their conventional military battered and humiliated but they will still have thousands of nukes with a weakened and corrupt command and control system.  I think Ukraine will win and expel Russia from all their territory and I will celebrate that, but the 'Russia problem' is only going to get worse IMO.

but the ‘Russia problem’ is only going to get worse IMO.

Arguably Russia has squandered any reputation for military competence in addition to the tens of thousands of trained, experienced soldiers who’ve been killed or wounded in Ukraine. I’ve no doubt that domestic propaganda will perpetuate the narratives you describe, but Russia’s ability to wage large scale war will have been severely diminished, possibly for generations.

but Russia’s ability to wage large scale war will have been severely diminished, possibly for generations.

I would agree with all of that if you had said wage conventional  large scale war.  I've never thought that Putin would use nuclear weapons, even low yield 'tactical' ones in the current conflict.  In the future though, the very fact that their manpower and conventional forces have will have been severely degraded lowers the threshold for whichever bitter ultranationalist is in the Kremlin to use nukes IMO.

They will be broke, their conventional military battered and humiliated but they will still have thousands of nukes with a weakened and corrupt command and control system.

I broadly agree with your summary, but one of the unknowns we’re dealing with here is the condition of Russia’s nukes and their delivery mechanisms. Nuclear weapons and liquid fuelled rockets used to launch them require an awful lot of maintenance and they have a finite shelf life. Much has been written about Russia’s nuclear doctrine, but Russia’s vaunted state of the art conventional military has been hamstrung by poor maintenance and limited capacity to replenish.

Russia’s ability to wage large scale war will have been severely diminished

I would say their ability to wage medium scale war has been diminished. Unfortunately, that might make them more likely to try large scale war using nuclear weapons, and even if only 10% of theirs work, we're still stuffed, even if they're more stuffed. It's a delicate balance, I expect it's being wargamed quite extensively.

Sorry, I don’t buy it. “We’ve got no army left so we’re gonnna nuke the planet” - not a credible position.

@Greybeard.  I agree, my point exactly.  @PMJ1974 I also agree with your point regarding the questionable state of some of Russia's nukes. Liquid fuelled propulsion systems are more problematic than the warheads themselves.  Why the Russians have persisted with liquid fuel instead of solid propellants surprises me.  In a former life in the 1980s I worked at an ammo depot in germany where we stored Lance missiles, tactical nukes.  I always remember the fuel and oxidiser were 'UDMH' and 'IRFNA' - Unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine and Inhibited red fuming nitric acid.  Horrible, horrible stuff to store, move, handle and deal with leaks etc.  The manpower and maintenance required were huge, even with 1980s attitudes to COSH and HSAW!

However the Russians are used to working with those materials, in low tech weapons like SCUDS, their space and satellite program and ICBMs.  Even if corruption and poor maintenance has degraded some, a percentage will undoubtedly still work as Greybeard says.

Sorry, I don’t buy it. “We’ve got no army left so we’re gonnna nuke the planet” – not a credible position.

It might not be rational by our standards, but I'd argue that hypothetically it could be credible in future.  With an embittered, defeated, impoverished, resentful and humiliated  Russia?  With a  nutter in the Kremlin who only got there by being more nationalist and extreme than Putin?

We are all crystal ball gazing here, I'm shooting the breeze with no more insight than anyone else. I hope I'm wrong. I do think though that Russia is going to be a basket case and threat to peace whatever happens.

Sometimes the reaction of a few on here make some threads quite a hostile place to post.

Freedom of speech, thought, idea. Some just dont get it.

That might be aimed at me - totally misunderstood the point caher was trying to make, so I'm sorry if it came across as an over reaction.

I'm a big fan of freedom of speech, but disagreeing with someone is neither hostile nor an attempt to cancel them.

No worries, took it as neither.

I always remember the fuel and oxidiser were ‘UDMH’ and ‘IRFNA’ – Unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine and Inhibited red fuming nitric acid.

not sure you need to qualify that stuff as horrid. I am not a chemist but even to me that says ‘run away, keep running’

Well I think it all depends on whether you think Russia is controlled by nationalists or simply by money grabbing oligarchs. If the latter, I don't think they want to fry or destroy the assets they want to get their hands on.

I've read some excellent points - thank you @Greybeard and @blokeuptheroad.

I've learned a lot - I'm a layman, it's extremely good to read an account like this:

Liquid fuelled propulsion systems are more problematic than the warheads themselves. Why the Russians have persisted with liquid fuel instead of solid propellants surprises me. In a former life in the 1980s I worked at an ammo depot in germany where we stored Lance missiles, tactical nukes. I always remember the fuel and oxidiser were ‘UDMH’ and ‘IRFNA’ – Unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine and Inhibited red fuming nitric acid. Horrible, horrible stuff to store, move, handle and deal with leaks etc. The manpower and maintenance required were huge, even with 1980s attitudes to COSH and HSAW!

And this:

However the Russians are used to working with those materials, in low tech weapons like SCUDS, their space and satellite program and ICBMs. Even if corruption and poor maintenance has degraded some, a percentage will undoubtedly still work as Greybeard says.

In short, thank you both!

Sorry, I don’t buy it. “We’ve got no army left so we’re gonnna nuke the planet” – not a credible position.

FWIW, I agree.

Some Russian ICBMs are solid fueled, they aren't all liquid fueled. The only safe assumption to make about the Russian nuclear forces is that enough of their missiles and bombs would work that they could destroy the planet.

That might be aimed at me

Nope, just a general and not pointing elbows at anyone specific. Those who have been guilty of such know they've acted badly.

And if they dont. Well, theres little hope for them at this late stage 😆

. We need a comet heading towards us or something to wake up and realise we can’t afford it as a species

I've seen that movie, it doesn't end well.

I’ve seen that movie, it doesn’t end well.

Maybe you saw the director's cut or something. The version I saw had the guy from Thunderwings realizing that when you had control reversal, you could pull out of a dive by pushing forward on the control stick so he became the first person to break the sound barrier.

Sorry, I don’t buy it. “We’ve got no army left so we’re gonnna nuke the planet” – not a credible position.

FWIW +1
The Russian dogma is expansion. Without an army to follow along behind there's little point. I think that Georgia has to watch out for conventional attack though
Attacking the country of Russia might get a little hotter, which is why countries have had to be careful about not tripping an invisible wire and only supplying defensive and short-range weapons

Arguably Russia has squandered any reputation for military competence

I don't think Russia has ever had a reputation for anything other than a total disregard for the lives of it's recruits, which lends ones army something of a advantage. Competence? No, not ever.

I'd say the main danger of a severely weakened Russia is Putin and how much control he'd still have, if you know you're going to be falling out of a window soon you might be tempted to try and take the world down with you

Competence? No, not ever.

As a BAOR cold war warrior in the 1980s, I can tell you we and the hierarchy absolutely believed the Soviet military was competent! The widespread view was that whole of NATO would not be able to hold back a Soviet armoured thrust across the inner German border with conventional weapons. It seems daft now, but we really believed this. Endless lectures about the skill of their spetznaz special forces, their sig int units that were even listening to us on exercise and tracking the careers of individual soldiers. Their believed complete mastery of combined arms operations and whole regiments of chemical warfare troops. Of course the Soviet forces were superior to the oligarch ravaged RF forces but they probably were never quite as good as we thought! This started to become more apparent after their Afghan adventure.

This film gives a flavour of the time. I remember watching this on a 16mm projector (through clouds of fag smoke) in our unit training wing. Along with endless films about Soviet vehicle and aircraft recognition, the law of armed conflict,  NBC drills etc. Good, but quite scary times!

The irony being that decades of fear of Soviet capabilities drove the US military industrial complex to insane heights and established a persistent level of technological and logistical dominance in conventional force projection that not even China is going to be to challenge for a very long time.

You could justifiably speculate that fear of the 'red menace' was deliberately stoked at the time by defence contractors and their lobbyists who were after a slice of that sweet Pentagon budget, but what's done is done.

not even China is going to be to challenge for a very long time.

They are definitely the next near-peer opponent, but I have a feeling that they may catch up and even overtake a bit quicker than we're all expecting...

It might not be rational by our standards, but I’d argue that hypothetically it could be credible in future.  With an embittered, defeated, impoverished, resentful and humiliated  Russia?  With a  nutter in the Kremlin who only got there by being more nationalist and extreme than Putin?

We are all crystal ball gazing here, I’m shooting the breeze with no more insight than anyone else. I hope I’m wrong. I do think though that Russia is going to be a basket case and threat to peace whatever happens.

This is a fair point. The thing to understand is that Russia/The Soviet Union/MotherRussia has always been a basket case. They've never even been close to competing on an economic basis with the West and "capitalism" and arguably never will (see decline and fall of the Soviet Union). As such their only option if they're to avoid stagnation at best is natural resources and military driven expansionism (nick the economies and natural resources of others in order to cover over decline at home).

If we accept that the Russians are never going to give up the way of life which so compromises their effectiveness, and that Russia is largely a vast, empty tract of relative nothingness, then the fact of the matter is that they're always going to be dangerous, in so far as they will cast covetous eyes on the rich pickings down the road. So degrading them as far as is possible right now can only lead to security for a time. Which is probably all that we can hope for.

I always remember the fuel and oxidiser were ‘UDMH’ and ‘IRFNA’ – Unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine and Inhibited red fuming nitric acid.

Strong stuff indeed. I dread to think what the Uninhibited Red Fuming Nitric Acid must be like..

but Russia’s ability to wage large scale war will have been severely diminished, possibly for generations.

I don't think so - where there is a will, there is a way. It took just 21 years for Germany re-equip and go back to war.

I dread to think what the Uninhibited Red Fuming Nitric Acid must be like

Isn't it Musk's new vision for Twitter?

Strong stuff indeed. I dread to think what the Uninhibited Red Fuming Nitric Acid must be like..

Isn't it a hip craft ale?

I dread to think what the Uninhibited Red Fuming Nitric Acid must be like

The chemical equivalent of Louise

I dread to think what the Uninhibited Red Fuming Nitric Acid must be like

strong dryness and smoke mixed with good flavors and just enough complexity, not too much though.

If anyone wants to know more about the horrors of storable liquid rocket propellants like IRFNA then I highly recommend 'Ignition'.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ignition-Informal-Propellants-University-Classics/dp/0813595835

There may or may not be PDF copies to be found on the web.

I'm so tempted by that even if it's a ridiculous thing to read about.

You won't regret it....

For a long time it's been out of print, it looks like mentions from Elon Musk and others has prompted a reprint.

The author has an intresting bio!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Drury_Clark
(sorry about the thread hijack)

I dread to think what the Uninhibited Red Fuming Nitric Acid must be like

A bouquet of a good claret, and best enjoyed alone in a park.

I dread to think what the Uninhibited Red Fuming Nitric Acid must be like

White fuming nitric acid lacks the intensity of the red, probably better choice for novices.

No doubt some will moan about cost or appropriateness, but I thought this was a nice gesture from the UK MOD.  I've got half a dozen old Zippos with unit crests on stuffed in drawers somewhere that I was given as leaving gifts.  As a lifelong non smoker they were never that much use to me, but I suspect they will be to the Ukr troops in the field this winter.

https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1593605115574816768?s=20&t=GuDjmGfov7l7NRazNMwfjw

Lighters always get used even if you don't smoke, just not as much. Yeah nice gesture.

 but I have a feeling that they may catch up and even overtake a bit quicker than we’re all expecting…

I see this a lot, and while I don't doubt that they have the tech, or the ability to make things like aircraft carriers and planes; a couple of things to bear in mind. 1. The Military in China is kept on a very very tight political leash. So much so that bits of the Air Force, Navy and even regional Army forces aren't allowed to train together often for fear that (like in the 50's in Korea) they start to become a powerful "counter revolutionary" force. 2. Shiny Kit doesn't necessarily mean that they have the capability to use it. Which leads onto 3. The Chinese military haven't been involved in a shooting war since a low level skirmish across the Vietnam border in the 70's. and a lobbing the occasional shell at both the ****stanis and Indians. Compared to the US who've pretty much been practicing "being at war", well, since they joined in with WW2.

I don't think they're a paper tiger by any means, but generally speaking; the armies of Authoritarian regimes tend to be more than a bit shit at doing war with outside forces, because really they're designed to be effective against their own populations.

Also, I chose my words very carefully, the US's advantages are technological and logistical, not necessarily purely in terms of actual fighting capacity, if you hypothetically teleported all of the US's military and all of China's military and all of their conventional gear into the middle of the steppe and let them have at it in one massive land-based head-to-head bloodbath it would probably would be a pretty even fight.

But that's not how modern wars work, force projection, the ability to get all your stuff where it needs to be, supplied, maintained and ready to rumble is key and here the US and NATO have a massive lead.

The global supply network needed to maintain that, and the decades old system of alliances that have been needed to build it in the first place will take decades to build, if they can be replicated at all.

Pretty good summary here:

it would probably would be a pretty even fight.

I doubt it personally, but I get the pint you're making. But yes, agreed, most folks just don't realise that the US Armed Force's ability to fight two wars at the level on intensity that they can simultaneously on two different continents (as they did in Afghanistan and Iraq) is pretty much unique.

Made me laugh more than it should, at least 1 russian now gets it.

https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1593573406829678593?

There may or may not be PDF copies to be found on the web.

Indeed.

Also, I chose my words very carefully, the US’s advantages are technological and logistical, not necessarily purely in terms of actual fighting capacity, if you hypothetically teleported all of the US’s military and all of China’s military and all of their conventional gear into the middle of the steppe and let them have at it in one massive land-based head-to-head bloodbath it would probably would be a pretty even fight.

Yeah but what about a fight between the Cat World and the Monkey Kingdom?