Lets say the west was not scared of muh red Russian line.

Lets say the west was not scared of muh red Russian line. What could they realistically send to strike deeper into Russia to hit the ammo factories, warehouses, bridges, bases etc.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    b-2 spirit

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      inb4 the crashed b2

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      pure kino

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Compromise Trump to roast russia because his words cut deep

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Just give em every single hornet and super hornet
    make more F-35s to cover the loss

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Whatever it would be might be deployed via X-37.

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Literally Tomahawks. Just hundreds of Tomahawks.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Yes but they need a launching platform

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        There's a land-based launcher for Tomahawks now, so.... just those I guess? They have a range of at the very least many hundreds of kilometers so even if they had to build a single one it would be able to reach out and disintegrate strategic targets like bridges and factories.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          i want the ukies to blow up the Russians submarines and strategic bombers. we know russia's industrial base is complete dog shit and they'd never be able to replace the subs and tu-22 bombers.

          then we could nuke Russia without them firing back

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Can they not be fired by HIMARS?
        I've been getting the impression that the americans have been angling for an "everything can be fired by everything else" kind of stupid with thier missiles for a while now

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          You see the thing at OP's pic? That thing fires Tomahawks. Not sure if HIMARS can fire those

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous
      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I'm willing to bet every penny I have that tomahawks can be launched from makeshift platform made from 2x4s

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Tomahawks
      The seething would be off of the fricking charts if Ukraine was able to do back to Russia what Russia has done with the Kalibr missiles lmao

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Implying that the Kalibrs are somehow near the destructive potential of a missile that knows where it is because it knows where it isn't.

  6. 1 year ago
    RC-135 Rivet Joint

    B-2s and RQ-180s(doing ISR) would open up strike corridors with high altitude stand off attacks that would enter the target location simultaneously with submarine launched cruise missiles. B-1Bs would then strike though these corridors and launch more stand off weapons. I suspect that F-22s would be doing CAP above the B-1Bs, ideally most of the Russian interceptor fleet would be destroyed by the first wave of attacks. Liberal use of MALD-Js to overwhelm and bait the Russian IADS to into turning on tracking radars.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      lol ok

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Oh no! Not half a dozen Gen 4 fighters. Heavens to Betsy whatever would we do?
        >F-35's you to death

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          F35 cant even dogfight a f16 lololo

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Neither can the F-14, F-15, or F-18, dumbass. It's a shame that none of that fricking matters in the real world where BVR, Radar, and EWAR packages are king.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >can't

            F16 pilots could barely keep up with F35s with a "clean" load(no external weapons or fuel tanks)

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            I'm sure that would matter if dogfights were still relevant outside of DCS

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous
  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    MGM-140 ATACMS. Apparently they were discussing giving some back in July but it didn't go anywhere.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I’m a moderate and I think we should give them a couple of minutemen.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    JASSM

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      also PrSM, as they already have HIMARS launchers

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    If Ukrainian helicopters can enter Russian air space and strike fuel facilities, I'm pretty sure F-22s, F-35s, and B-2s can hit whatever they want.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Imagine what they could have done with Comanches. I bet the guys who worked on them must have felt really frustrated when they saw Ukies successfully doing heli raids straight into Russia.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        If anything the Russia puppet theater tier warfare has proven the the Comanche programs was indeed unnecessary and that cancelling it was the right call. The only people in the world who it might now be applicable against is China and a war with them will never involve deep penetration helicopter raids due to geography. Comanche isn't going to fly across the sea of Japan.

        Building more than a couple would have gotten really expensive and it is unironically better that money went into F-35 instead, which is a more broadly applicable system. Comanche was designed to fight a threat that clearly stopped existing in 1991. The Ukrs have been doing the Comanches job with non stealth helos like the 52.

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    ATACMS is the first best option. They could realistically cripple Russian logisitics and can be launched from the M270 and HIMARS that Ukraine already has. My guess is Ukraine has these or GDLSB and is waiting until the spring to deploy them because the second shit starts popping off >75km behind the front, Russia will know the counterattack is imminent.

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    A combined NATO strikeforce

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    A few trident IIs, then say whoops my finger slipped when the Red Square becomes a carpark

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    kamikaze quad rotors so it looks like partisans

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >What could they realistically send
    Define "they" anon
    Ukies? Well, whatever the west would be willing to give them.
    NATO? Without exaggeration the biggest show of firepower in human history
    The main thing here is: Aside from Tomahawks and ICBMs/SLBMs the west mainly relies on planes for this kind of deep strike.
    So we'd need to train Ukie pilots to fly those planes which is much harder than training Ukie soldiers how to use HIMARS or comparable weapon systems.

    On the other hand, if NATO went all in...weeew boi.

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I'd exclusively target private schools for rich Russian kids.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      You want to bomb the UK?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        nah I know the richest kids don't study in Russia but their parents don't live there either. By attacking the upper class actually residing in Russia you can put immense pressure on the existing systems there.

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    If the West was not scared of muh red Russian line, they could realistically send some sneaky drones to strike deeper into Russia and hit their ammo factories, warehouses, bridges, bases etc. That would make Putin very angry and he would warn them of tough Russian action if they cross his red line. But the West would not care and keep sending more drones deeper and deeper into Russia, even to Crimea, which they still think is part of Ukraine. Putin would then compare them to jackals trying to please the US tiger Shere Khan from The Jungle Book. The West would laugh and say that Putin is just like Scar from The Lion King who wants to be king but can't handle the hyenas. And then they would all sing "Hakuna Matata" while Russia burns.

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >One idea is that the West could use its superior air power and precision-guided munitions to strike deeper into Russia's territory, targeting its critical infrastructure, military bases, and supply lines. This would require overcoming Russia's formidable air defenses and risking escalation with a nuclear-armed adversary .
    >Another idea is that the West could support Ukraine's counter-offensive by providing more lethal weapons, intelligence, training, and logistical assistance. This would enable Ukraine to regain control of its territory and inflict heavy losses on Russia's forces .
    >A third idea is that the West could impose crippling economic sanctions on Russia, cutting off its access to global markets, finance, and technology. This would undermine Russia's ability to sustain its war effort and increase domestic discontent with Putin's regime .

  19. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Jets and whatever bombs and missiles they can carry.

    Artillery is an afterthought in NATO and it relies mostly on air forces.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *