cichociemny.bsky.social
"My o jedno tylko szlemy
Modły k'niebu z naszej chaty:
By nam buty mogły śmierdzieć,
Jak śmierdziały przed stu laty."
"Patryota" (K.P.T. 1898)
125 posts
216 followers
43 following
Prolific Poster
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
Yes, they do. I am not sure if English offers some more precise word for "incremental" here. 30 million-strong, poor (economically), drip-fed with weapons Ukraine, sustains russian attacks for 2.5 years loosing 1-2% of territory, while 400 million strong EU, second or third world economy, trembles.
comment in response to
post
Patosędzia chyba.
comment in response to
post
True. This war shows that we need to keep russians at distance. But they will come with the same solutions as Ukraine has now. Maybe even the war will start without crossing borders, just instead of "green men" well see swarms of "green drones", "available at every corner"
comment in response to
post
Also drones. For one Leopard tank (that will survive maybe 30 minutes in modern battlefield) you can buy 28.000 fibre optic drones or 50.000 of FPV drones, assuming 5 drones to kill 1 soldier, you can either buy Leopard or destroy 10.000 russian troops with the same EUR. A conservative estimate.
comment in response to
post
Also the general observation - one leopard tank is approx. 28.000.000 EUR. One Javellin or Spike missile able to destroy such tank is 200.000 EUR. For one tank you can have 100 missiles. Even if you assume 5 to destroy 1 tank, you either buy a tank or destroy 20 tanks with the same $$$.
comment in response to
post
And of course, electronic warfare. Drones. We help Ukraine with drones and they dominate the battlefield. Drone becomes a "hand grenade" of modern warfare. We need to be able to stop russian drones (also FO ones) and be able to hurt russians with our own loitering munition.
comment in response to
post
We lack many capacities but not all capacities are needed (like great fleet of aircraft carriers or amphibious). We need better orbital surveillance, more long range anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons (spike, javellin) and lots of 155mm ammo of all sorts. Napoleon is dead, yet artillery rules.
comment in response to
post
According to leaket Stratfor reports, "Baltics are indefensible". Indeed they do not posses operational depth. But we are not blind, we will see troops concentration and we have air and technological superiority. They won't be able to drop their gliding bombs unpunished.
comment in response to
post
E tam, Gawkowski sobie nie wyobraża... Przyjedzie Trump, albo lepiej, wyśle swojego speca od manicure i dostaniemy ultimatum - albo oddajemy wszystkie gorzelnie Amerykańcom, i na dodatek Hel, jako terytorium USA, albo skończy się starlink, F35 i coś tam jeszcze.
comment in response to
post
How do you assume an armored column can make a break in the lines of defence and advance 40km in a narrow corridor without being decimated by modern air force in their own backyard?
comment in response to
post
All these statements are like EU has no Air Forces and no recon. How can russian armored columns advance when air is dominated by the enemy?
comment in response to
post
A czego nie było wiadomo wcześniej? Tak kilka miesięcy temu, gdy komisja przesłuchiwała funkcjonariuszy i żądała informacji?
comment in response to
post
Wg. konstytucji nie może dwie kadencje, ale ostatnio w rozmowach z kolegami z USA, nie mogliśmy tego wykluczyć.
comment in response to
post
po co?
comment in response to
post
ups!
comment in response to
post
Sroki. Sroki pięknie wkurzają koty. Potrafią stadem tego kota przepędzić. Weź psa. Nie będzie kotów ;-)