• 14th_cylon@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    It is more for a show I guess, which is not to say they shouldn’t do it.

    Surely first step in invasion over the bridge would be to just hit that bridge with some rocket…?

      • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think it can be for two things at once. Definetly more for show, but increases annoyance/makes a possible invasion more annoying.

        Obviously I imagine they have a way to blow up the bridge too which sounds far more effective.

          • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Would make sense that main invasion would be from the east, but a second front may be opened to try and collapse the “enemy” who would likely be stretched thin.

            • protist@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              If Russia tries to go to war with NATO, Kaliningrad is instantly blockaded and defeated. Russia can hide nothing in Kaliningrad

              • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Unless Trump withdraws, Russian war would have to be won in a week. By the time american logistical supplies and reinforcements start coming in strong, Russia is fucked.

                • protist@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  You don’t think Europe has the means to defend itself against Russia?! Lmao

    • Saleh@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t get the downvotes. Landmines are a huge issue. The balkan countries are still struggling with them 30 years after the wars. Cambodia, Vietnam, Iraq… every “theater” of war, where landmines have been used are, still struggling with them decades and decades more after. Ukraine too will suffer for decades.

      If there is an inevitable military need for them, there is no alternative. But they should not be used lightly and i am fairly certain, that Lithuania is not doing so lightly either.

      The big problem is, that for now the only reliable technique to remove landmines from an area is to dig up the area step by step. This is extremely costly and still dangerous, despite all effort in using robots, animals detecting the explosives and so on. So i hope Lithuania triple counted the mines they put and keeps that record very well.

      • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        The problem doesn’t really come from small fields like this. It’s when you hand them out by the truckload and tell every unit to go wild. Russia has had numerous cases where they didn’t even tell their own friendly units where the mines were, so I’d say that’s a much bigger issue than this little where the whole world knows about it.