(06-01-2025, 11:58 PM)RickyD Wrote: I have questions the more I have time to think things over...does anyone have more to add or is this the extent of it?

In Pearl Harbor, it was the old military stock that got hit. The ships that came next where stronger, bigger, faster and more of it

(06-01-2025, 11:58 PM)RickyD Wrote: Just curious as I am now finally off work...nightmare day...has anyone seen any other footage or pictures of any of the damage other than the 4x Tu-95s? Also isn't a Tu-95 like the equivalent of a B-52...why would that be a big win? Why didn't they target the hangars which typically house the prized aircraft? I have questions the more I have time to think things over...does anyone have more to add or is this the extent of it?

No, I haven't, and likely, we will never know the real extent, or lack thereof, of the damage.

I have a hard time believing all planes were damaged beyond repair #1 

I've heard reports that the drones were programmed to hit the wings, where the fuel tanks are, for maximum damage. One report suggested AI target identification took over once they flew to the specific base coordinates. 

As for hitting the hangers, I don't think the drones have that much punch, where they can hit and hanger roof and significantly damage what is inside.

(06-01-2025, 10:15 PM)annonentity Wrote: Moscow underground railway system is a bunker. The western governments have told their citizens to stock some food and water and stay indoors. The world I live in is that if idiots want to kill each other, let them go for it just don't involve me.

Depends on what you are referring to as bunker.  Might protect against a blast.  Much different than being protected from fallout and contamination.  Everything from filtering air to contaminated water leaking in.  And having shielding against radiation.  

Morbid.  But if it’s an all out nuclear war.  Sitting on my roof with sunglasses and pray to be vaporized.  Screw that trying to live through a contaminated nuclear winter crap to live like a mad max.  Better to die meek than forget your humanity living like a parasite off each other being strong.

All reports I've seen was that the US and NATO were not briefed prior and the little prancing weirdo did this all on his own. Now he can take responsibility for the potential Russian tac nuke response and he can clap himself on the back when half his country is deemed a radiation hazard for the next decade.

(06-02-2025, 08:15 AM)Inspector44 Wrote: "All reports I've seen was that the US and NATO were not briefed prior and the little prancing weirdo did this all on his own. Now he can take responsibility for the potential Russian tac nuke response and he can clap himself on the back when half his country is deemed a radiation hazard for the next decade."

As Exeter wrote above:

"The most recent version of the doctrine allows use of a nuclear response to a conventional attack that “poses a critical threat to sovereignty or territorial integrity”. This probably doesn’t rise to that level."

Apart from that, Putin knows that the inevitable sanctions that would follow would cripple his already faltering economy.

(06-01-2025, 09:25 PM)annonentity Wrote: He said that Russia hasn't the resources to fight a conventional  war with the West, that's why they have underground bunkers for all of the citizens. Because the war will be full on nuclear exchange. I doubt whether the bombers matter it is the missiles and the subs that will do the damage.

Russia hasn't the capability to enter into a conventional war with Western and Central European forces let alone take on the full might of NATO.

Underground bunkers for ALL its citizens?
Russia has never prioritised the safety and well being of its ordinary citizens.....what makes you think Putin really gives a toss about their safety and survival now?

Do you really understand the logistics required to feed and maintain such a huge number of people?
The sanitary conditions would be horrendous, there would be an incredibly high risk of the epidemic spread of diseases etc......and what sort of world would they emerge to given the scale of the nuclear conflict you seem to be predicting - and have been for quite some time now as far as I recollect?
They most definitely would not be able to stay underground for long.

Putin once said "Without Russia there is no world".
I think he's enough of a power crazed, narcissistic psychopath that if he was surrounded - say something akin to Hitler in Berlin in 1945 - he would try to initiate an all out first strike nuclear attack.
But I think we are still quite some way off that yet.

If he ever does try it lets hope there'll be some modern day equivalent of Stanislav Petrov.

Got to say well done to Ukraine for carrying out such a well planned attack deep in Russian territory.
I hope they have a few more tricks and surprised up their sleeves.

"Make Russia Small Again."

T-Shirt worn by Zelenskyy.
Ticked off Russia when he wore it.
I don't like the guy.
But I like his T-Shirt.

(06-01-2025, 08:52 AM)putnam6 Wrote: 'Huge breach of defences': Ukraine claims to have inflicted damage worth $2bn with drone attack deep inside RussiaMore details now from Deborah Haynes, security and defence editor and Azad Safarov, Ukraine producer, on the special operation - codenamed "Web" - launched by Ukraine to target Russian bombers.
Ukraine is conducting a "large-scale" drone operation against the Russian air force, hitting more than 40 bomber aircraft across four bases deep inside Russia, security sources have said.
It appears to be the most significant operation of its kind since the start of Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine more than three years ago, and is a huge breach of Russia's national defences.
A Ukrainian government source said that the drones were launched inside Russia.
One of the targets – the Belaya airfield – is more than 2,500 miles from the Ukrainian border.
Videos shared with Sky News by Ukraine's SBU Security Service purport to show a line of Russian strategic bombers with smoke billowing out of them.
"Enemy strategic bombers are massively burning in Russia - this is the result of a special SBU operation," a security source said.
"Right now, the Security Service of Ukraine is conducting a large-scale special operation to destroy enemy bombers in the rear of Russia.
"The SBU drones are targeting aircraft that bomb Ukrainian cities every night. So far, more than 40 planes have been hit, including A-50, Tu-95 and Tu-22 M3."
At least one of the videos is purportedly of the Belaya airfield.
A voice can be heard saying in Ukrainian: "This is how nice looking now airport Belaya, strategic enemy aviation."
The codename for the Ukrainian operation is "Web".
Sources claimed to have inflicted more than $2bn (£1.4bn) worth of damage on the Russian air force.
"We are waiting for the details. And we hope that the number of hit aircraft will increase!" one source said.
The other Russian airbases targeted by Ukraine were: Diagilevo, Olenya and Ivanovo airfields.

Fascinating that they were able to pull this off so deep into enemy lines.

How many home grown 'domestic terrorists' do the Russians have inside aiding these things?

My correspondent in the Russian Defence Force /Russian Volunteer Division of the Ukrainian Army recruits guys for things like this on Telegram.
They won't stop until Putin is out of power.

(06-01-2025, 08:52 AM)putnam6 Wrote: double

(06-01-2025, 11:58 PM)RickyD Wrote: Just curious as I am now finally off work...nightmare day...has anyone seen any other footage or pictures of any of the damage other than the 4x Tu-95s? Also isn't a Tu-95 like the equivalent of a B-52...why would that be a big win? Why didn't they target the hangars which typically house the prized aircraft? I have questions the more I have time to think things over...does anyone have more to add or is this the extent of it?

Yes, the TU-95 is roughly equivalent to the B-52.  Both first went operational in the early 1950s, both were very large, high-subsonic strategic bombers designed to carry large thermonuclear bombs over intercontinental distances.  Both have never stopped being targeted against the opponent from that time forward, and the production lines for both disappeared decades ago.  Once they're gone, they're gone. 

They didn't target the hangars because these were relatively small drones--carrying a payload of only a kilo or so of HE.  That small of an explosive would do no significant damage, to a hangar. The only way to take out one of these aircraft is to land on the wing directly over a fuel tank, blow a hole in the wing, and let the ensuing fire consume the rest of the aircraft.

Why this would be a big win (if it would be a big win) is a very interesting question.  Although this type of aircraft has been used in the past to attack Ukraine (usually with long-range stand-off weapons) this particular set of aircraft were ultimately aimed at the US and NATO.  As such, the attack doesn't seem to do much to relieve the immediate military pressure on Ukraine.  On the other hand, the strategic analyst Peter Zeihan made the interesting observation this morning that this attack had the effect of causing the biggest single reduction in Russia's strategic nuclear threat to the US since 1945.  Could this have been a strategic move on the part of Ukraine to show the West (and the US in particular) that it can be a valuable strategic partner, thereby ensuring more support from the West?