Jovial Monk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 27, 2022 3:36 pm
I am typing this slowly for Bo
oby’s benefit:
Tomahawk cruise missiles require WAY too much infrastructure—the russians would destroy them very quickly.
With a Javelin shoulder mounted AT missile, one or two Ukrainian soldiers can fire a missile at a tank, ditch the launcher and skedaddle before return fire hits the spot they fired the missile from. How the FUCK can you do that with all the infrastructure a Tomahawk missile needs?
The Ukraine defence forces use a simple drone like you could buy from Amazon to locate columns of russian vehicles than set up their attack. Simple, light, nimble sort of warfare that the Ukrainians have stopped the russians with.
Actually cruise missiles can be launched from aircraft:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air-launc ... se_missile
even ground launched:
https://breakingdefense.com/2021/04/aus ... nt-stupid/
The Ground-Launched Cruise Missile (GLCM), made for the Air Force, was a modified Navy BGM-109A Tomahawk
What they need is the information from satellites for the terrain following radar guidance.
The Yanks get that from satellites and could supply it and help with suitable targeting
of enemy command and control centers etc.
The Yanks can even fire them from ships and submarines.
That's how the Yanks would fight the war in Ukraine if their soldiers
were in the firing line of mad Russians.
They wouldn't muck around like we're seeing now.
Russia would be deaf, dumb and blind within 2 hours.