Ukraine War

[956 Worldwide 34419]

6 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Thanks for the clarification. I'm not even advocating that tactic.  Nor am I saying we'd definitively move into a nuclear conflict if battlefield/ tactical nukes were used by Russia.  Any overt offensive move by the west would be an invitation to the escalation of the war.  

How far is Putin willing to go in this fucked up Soviet era, glory days, seeking mission of his ?  That's the $64,000 question.

Just trying to steer the conversation back to at least the realm of the technically feasible, and yours was the last post on the idea of a stand-off/non-manned NATO strike on Russian forces in Ukraine.  
 

I think the answer is that he’s willing to absorb more pain than NATO could stomach in return, and to bluff past where we are comfortable, but perhaps not more than the Ukrainians are willing to take.  

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Just trying to steer the conversation back to at least the realm of the technically feasible, and yours was the last post on the idea of a stand-off/non-manned NATO strike on Russian forces in Ukraine.  
 

I think the answer is that he’s willing to absorb more pain than NATO could stomach in return, and to bluff past where we are comfortable, but perhaps not more than the Ukrainians are willing to take.  

Thanks, Yeah, he's going to push this as far as he thinks he can get away with I believe.  How badly is he willing to deplete his forces to sustain a prolonged invasion ?  And what are his plans for escalation of the weapons he has at hand, conventional, bio, chemical, nuke ?

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

Is it just me, or is Putin taking a page out of King Jong Un's playbook here?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/20/russia-tests-nuclear-missile-putin-intercontinental-ballistic-weapon

[RomaVicta 29773]

18 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Thanks for the clarification. I'm not even advocating that tactic.  Nor am I saying we'd definitively move into a nuclear conflict if battlefield/ tactical nukes were used by Russia.  Any overt offensive move by the west would be an invitation to the escalation of the war.  

How far is Putin willing to go in this fucked up Soviet era, glory days, seeking mission of his ?  That's the $64,000 question.

 

18 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Just trying to steer the conversation back to at least the realm of the technically feasible, and yours was the last post on the idea of a stand-off/non-manned NATO strike on Russian forces in Ukraine.  
 

I think the answer is that he’s willing to absorb more pain than NATO could stomach in return, and to bluff past where we are comfortable, but perhaps not more than the Ukrainians are willing to take.  

956 is largely responding to my post. I appreciate it. I did mention the Ukraine being empowered to make the call had it been more technologically feasible.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33833]

45 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Is it just me, or is Putin taking a page out of King Jong Un's playbook here?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/20/russia-tests-nuclear-missile-putin-intercontinental-ballistic-weapon

yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and call bullshit
 

Quote

“The new complex has the highest tactical and technical characteristics and is capable of overcoming all modern means of anti-missile defence. It has no analogues in the world and will not have for a long time to come,” Putin said.

 

[kevwun 15611]

A Ukrainian is probably going to shoot one down with a stinger.

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11668]

49 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

“The new complex has the highest tactical and technical characteristics and is capable of overcoming all modern means of anti-missile defence. It has no analogues in the world and will not have for a long time to come,” Putin said.

"no no no no.  look, just because every piece of military equipment we've shown you has been absolute garbage doesn't mean the stuff we keep in reserve isn't the best in the world."

[Macanudo 12925]

13 minutes ago, kevwun said:

A Ukrainian is probably going to shoot one down with a stinger.

Or BB gun.

[Chad Fuck 17551]

A Ukrainian is probably going to shoot one down with a stinger.

Jar of pickles.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Shoot em down ?  Hell they just have to wait till they run out of fuel, and land on a road or field somewhere.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

 

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33833]

 

[DigglerontheHoof 21051]

WTF is Russia even at the G20?

[WhatTheBuck 28705]

56 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

WTF is Russia even at the G20?

Is there a way to keep them out?

[Hookah Horns 3073]

Not telling them where the meeting is and changing the name to G19 would seem to do the trick. 

[WhatTheBuck 28705]

27 minutes ago, Hookah Horns said:

Not telling them where the meeting is and changing the name to G19 would seem to do the trick. 

Just turn the lights off and everyone stay quiet when the Russians come knocking on the door. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33833]

Tom Cotton can fuck all the way off

 

[Brisketexan 104548]

7 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Is there a way to keep them out?

Sure.  Tell 'em the location of the meeting is posted on a bulletin board outside Kyiv City Hall.  If they want to find out where it is, they need to come to Kyiv and read it.  Good luck, bitches.

[bangkok 89]

well, fuck i've been about as anti-escalation as any of you, but i'm starting to lean towards the other side, especially considering putin's now very clear incompetence and obvious war crimes.

he's weaker now than a few weeks ago.

maybe a brief but decisive, nato-backed escalation limits loss of life and ends the war more quickly.

and if we can limit loss of life as much as possible, i'm pro-that.

i think we're nearing a point of that being most reasonable, rather than allowing this to drag on indefinitely.

looking at the other side, what would putin do? absolute worst case, launch nukes. 

as horrific as that would be, thats a losing scenario for putin, too. and it's a very long shot.

the chance seems small enough to just round up nato, declare we're protecting nato interests and we've seen enough of this bullshit. and i'd give them fair warning - get the fuck out or we'll fuck you up. 

gave him a choice first, go home and you can propagandize some sort of bullshit to save face or we'll crush you.

see more benefits to this now than drawbacks.

[Hookah Horns 3073]

16 hours ago, bangkok said:

well, fuck i've been about as anti-escalation as any of you, but i'm starting to lean towards the other side, especially considering putin's now very clear incompetence and obvious war crimes.

he's weaker now than a few weeks ago.

maybe a brief but decisive, nato-backed escalation limits loss of life and ends the war more quickly.

and if we can limit loss of life as much as possible, i'm pro-that.

i think we're nearing a point of that being most reasonable, rather than allowing this to drag on indefinitely.

looking at the other side, what would putin do? absolute worst case, launch nukes. 

as horrific as that would be, thats a losing scenario for putin, too. and it's a very long shot.

the chance seems small enough to just round up nato, declare we're protecting nato interests and we've seen enough of this bullshit. and i'd give them fair warning - get the fuck out or we'll fuck you up. 

gave him a choice first, go home and you can propagandize some sort of bullshit to save face or we'll crush you.

see more benefits to this now than drawbacks.

It's pretty clear by now that we will tolerate anything short of a literal attack on US or NATO territory. 

It's not just nukes that scare us, the Russians are all up in our cyberspace and could bring us to our knees with some keystrokes. The scariest thing there is MAD doesn't apply to cyber as neatly as it does nuclear; while we could (probably) still fuck a lot of their shit up, we are vastly more connected and dependent on the internet than they are. They also have less to lose in a cyber war, seeing as how we've already taken the piss out of their economy. However, cyber attacks on a big enough scale could easily lead to nuclear war, so MAD is still part of the calculus. 

And who knows, maybe we're not even in their stuff to the extent they're in ours.

Edited April 22, 2022 by Hookah Horns

[immamac 42516]

18 minutes ago, Hookah Horns said:

It's pretty clear by now that we will tolerate anything short of a literal attack on US or NATO territory. 

It's not just nukes that scare us, the Russians are all up in our cyberspace and could bring us to our knees with some keystrokes. The scariest thing there is MAD doesn't exactly apply to cyber; while we could (probably) still fuck a lot of their shit up, we are vastly more connected and dependent on the internet than they are. They also have less to lose in a cyber war, seeing as how we've already taken the piss out of their economy. However, cyber attacks on a big enough scale could easily lead to nuclear war, so MAD is still part of the calculus. 

And who knows, maybe we're not even in their stuff to the extent they're in ours.

This is the dumbest thing I've read today and I was in the track and field pages of the 2023 recruiting thread earlier. 

Cyber attacks from Russia would comprise of a lot more than "a few keystrokes" and the mitigation of said attacks has already been underway and they have been unable to effectively cripple Ukraine with said cyber attacks (and even physical EMP attacks against space x). The threat of catastrophic Russian cyber attacks is extremely low - and we haven't even retaliated yet. 

Meanwhile Anonymous has hacked the shit out of the Russians relentlessly for the last 50+ days, mainly using the hacks for information exposure instead of Ransom or deletion. The Kremlin and it's internal network have been compromised.

Removing them from the wider backbone to mitigate large scale cyber attacks is also relatively straightforward - there are already 2 pipes shut down, only 4 or 5 more would need to go and poof no external access for Russians. Good luck starting a cyber attack outside of Russia. 

Cyber would also under no circumstances ever lead to an escalation from the US into nuclear war. This is the fucking dumbest thing in your whole post. Maybe Russia would start shit if we started a cyber attack on them, but there would be no world where we would retaliate with a non-lethal disruption of service with deaths of hundreds of millions. Like I can't even fathom how stupid that statement is. 

In case you haven't figured out Russia is firmly in the "and find out" stage of fun around and find out. 

Their flagship of the black sea sits at the bottom of the sea. They have not had a single military success in the entire campaign and were forced to massively retreat from the northern Ukrainian theater. They are sitting ducks with dwindling supply, meanwhile Ukraine now has more mobile artillery and armored capacity than Russia due to supply from the rest of the world coupled with a drastic amount of losses on the Russian side. They are quickly being backed into a corner which will require them to fully retreat or be eradicated inside of Ukraine, which is leading some actual experts to think a tactical nuke will be used. Once nukes are used China and India can no longer sit on the sidelines and it effectively starts WW3 or ends with Russia being cut off from the ENTIRE world. If it's close enough to a NATO country and there is real demonstrable damage it could also be enough to initiate article 5.

In short, Russia is fucked unless China and a few others who have sat on the sidelines side with them over the rest of the world on using nukes against a non nuclear threat in a sovereign country, which they are invading, not being invaded by.  

[WhatTheBuck 28705]

24 minutes ago, Hookah Horns said:

It's pretty clear by now that we will tolerate anything short of a literal attack on US or NATO territory. 

It's not just nukes that scare us, the Russians are all up in our cyberspace and could bring us to our knees with some keystrokes. The scariest thing there is MAD doesn't apply to cyber as neatly as it does nuclear; while we could (probably) still fuck a lot of their shit up, we are vastly more connected and dependent on the internet than they are. They also have less to lose in a cyber war, seeing as how we've already taken the piss out of their economy. However, cyber attacks on a big enough scale could easily lead to nuclear war, so MAD is still part of the calculus. 

And who knows, maybe we're not even in their stuff to the extent they're in ours.

We’re not going to put boots on the ground in Ukraine. We’ll keep arming them and keep encouraging our allies to do the same. From what I hear, France and Germany need to do more. But we’ve now delivered some helicopters, just 11 from what I’ve heard, which doesn’t sound like much, but maybe our NATO partners are delivering some too. We’ve delivered 72 Howitzers. I hear that the Ukrainians really like those. Zelensky reportedly said, “This is what we’ve been waiting for.”

When it comes to cyber, the reporting I’ve heard is that we have the capability to fuck Russia up if we want to. We are fully capable in the cyber arena just as we are in the nuclear arena. Vlad knows that. Despite his tough talk, we don’t need to say it out loud.

Ukraine isn’t part of NATO and we’re not obligated to go to battle to defend them. If the Russians step one foot into Moldova, we’ll destroy them.

[Hookah Horns 3073]

17 minutes ago, immamac said:

This is the dumbest thing I've read today and I was in the track and field pages of the 2023 recruiting thread earlier. 

Cyber attacks from Russia would comprise of a lot more than "a few keystrokes" and the mitigation of said attacks has already been underway and they have been unable to effectively cripple Ukraine with said cyber attacks (and even physical EMP attacks against space x). The threat of catastrophic Russian cyber attacks is extremely low - and we haven't even retaliated yet. 

Meanwhile Anonymous has hacked the shit out of the Russians relentlessly for the last 50+ days, mainly using the hacks for information exposure instead of Ransom or deletion. The Kremlin and it's internal network have been compromised.

Removing them from the wider backbone to mitigate large scale cyber attacks is also relatively straightforward - there are already 2 pipes shut down, only 4 or 5 more would need to go and poof no external access for Russians. Good luck starting a cyber attack outside of Russia. 

Cyber would also under no circumstances ever lead to an escalation from the US into nuclear war. This is the fucking dumbest thing in your whole post. Maybe Russia would start shit if we started a cyber attack on them, but there would be no world where we would retaliate with a non-lethal disruption of service with deaths of hundreds of millions. Like I can't even fathom how stupid that statement is. 

In case you haven't figured out Russia is firmly in the "and find out" stage of fun around and find out. 

Their flagship of the black sea sits at the bottom of the sea. They have not had a single military success in the entire campaign and were forced to massively retreat from the northern Ukrainian theater. They are sitting ducks with dwindling supply, meanwhile Ukraine now has more mobile artillery and armored capacity than Russia due to supply from the rest of the world coupled with a drastic amount of losses on the Russian side. They are quickly being backed into a corner which will require them to fully retreat or be eradicated inside of Ukraine, which is leading some actual experts to think a tactical nuke will be used. Once nukes are used China and India can no longer sit on the sidelines and it effectively starts WW3 or ends with Russia being cut off from the ENTIRE world. If it's close enough to a NATO country and there is real demonstrable damage it could also be enough to initiate article 5.

In short, Russia is fucked unless China and a few others who have sat on the sidelines side with them over the rest of the world on using nukes against a non nuclear threat in a sovereign country, which they are invading, not being invaded by.  

It's always funny when someone is this confident in their ignorance. Being a huge prick about it too is even more entertaining.

You have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. Did I say that the US would launch the nukes? No, you illiterate boob, I didn't. 

I'm not sure what your hatred of the "few keystrokes" comment is all about. Maybe you're not aware that Russian hackers already almost certainly have back doors in critical systems. Yes, it's a few keystrokes. 

[immamac 42516]

1 minute ago, Hookah Horns said:

It's always funny when someone is this confident in their ignorance. Being a huge prick about it too is even more entertaining.

You have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. Did I say that the US would launch the nukes? No, you illiterate boob, I didn't. 

I'm not sure what your hatred of the "few keystrokes" comment is all about. Maybe you're not aware that Russian hackers already almost certainly have back doors in critical systems. Yes, it's a few keystrokes. 

You are just doom mongering and it's stupid. NATO isn't tolerating shit and your entire post was dumb and made to get people to think shit is all scary. 

[WhatTheBuck 28705]

I suppose one question is, what if Putin does try to invade Moldova? Obviously any Russian troops on Moldovan soil would be fair game. But what about the Russian Navy in the Black Sea? Wouldn’t that make them aggressors against NATO too? Wouldn’t the supply lines running through Ukraine become aggressors against NATO too? We would kick the shit out of those incompetent bastards so hard.

Hell, the Ukrainians took down the Russian flagship in the Black Sea with a couple of missiles. I heard several weeks ago that we were sending a carrier group to the region. I assume we have a stealth submarine in the area keeping an eye on things. Step one inch into Moldova and I think that would be legitimate justification to sink the Russian fleet in the Black Sea at the very least. 

[Chad Fuck 17551]

I suppose one question is, what if Putin does try to invade Moldova? Obviously any Russian troops on Moldovan soil would be fair game. But what about the Russian Navy in the Black Sea? Wouldn’t that make them aggressors against NATO too? Wouldn’t the supply lines running through Ukraine become aggressors against NATO too? We would kick the shit out of those incompetent bastards so hard.
Hell, the Ukrainians took down the Russian flagship in the Black Sea with a couple of missiles. I heard several weeks ago that we were sending a carrier group to the region. I assume we have a stealth submarine in the area keeping an eye on things. Step one inch into Moldova and I think that would be legitimate justification to sink the Russian fleet in the Black Sea at the very least. 

Aren’t there Russian troops already in Transnistria? Or are they gone now? I thought that was part of what the thrust westward towards Odessa was about? A grand idea of linking up with Transnistria and cutting off the Black Sea coast entirely.

[Hookah Horns 3073]

21 minutes ago, immamac said:

You are just doom mongering and it's stupid. NATO isn't tolerating shit and your entire post was dumb and made to get people to think shit is all scary. 

Not the case at all. Everything I said is supported by facts. I'm sorry it triggered you. Maybe read some more. 

NATO is definitely tolerating what's going on right now in Ukraine. Not sure how you could argue otherwise. My best guess is you couldn't figure out that by "tolerating" I meant not attacking Russia, and you thought I was critical of NATO for not caring or something. I'm not sure how anyone's reading comprehension could be that shitty, though. 

[Pods 7526]

2 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Aren’t there Russian troops already in Transnistria? Or are they gone now? I thought that was part of what the thrust westward towards Odessa was about? A grand idea of linking up with Transnistria and cutting off the Black Sea coast entirely.

Since 1992. 

[WhatTheBuck 28705]

1 minute ago, Chad Fuck said:

Aren’t there Russian troops already in Transnistria? Or are they gone now? I thought that was part of what the thrust westward towards Odessa was about? A grand idea of linking up with Transnistria and cutting off the Black Sea coast entirely.

I haven’t heard that. I know that’s a goal. President Lukashenko of Belarus revealed that Moldova was in their game plan weeks ago and I just heard something about it again today on Morning Joe. But the Russians failed to take Kyiv, haven’t taken Odesa, and have pulled back to the East. I would find it hard to believe that they have any boots on the ground in Moldova or, if they did, that they aren’t all dead by now.

[Hookah Horns 3073]

14 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I suppose one question is, what if Putin does try to invade Moldova? Obviously any Russian troops on Moldovan soil would be fair game. But what about the Russian Navy in the Black Sea? Wouldn’t that make them aggressors against NATO too? Wouldn’t the supply lines running through Ukraine become aggressors against NATO too? We would kick the shit out of those incompetent bastards so hard.

Hell, the Ukrainians took down the Russian flagship in the Black Sea with a couple of missiles. I heard several weeks ago that we were sending a carrier group to the region. I assume we have a stealth submarine in the area keeping an eye on things. Step one inch into Moldova and I think that would be legitimate justification to sink the Russian fleet in the Black Sea at the very least. 

In Moldova I could see them doing that thing where they send in a bunch of plain clothes soldiers to play separatist. 

Much of your post confuses me though. How would attacking Moldova be aggression against NATO? Moldova isn't in NATO. 

[Pods 7526]

6 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I haven’t heard that. I know that’s a goal. President Lukashenko of Belarus revealed that Moldova was in their game plan weeks ago and I just heard something about it again today on Morning Joe. But the Russians failed to take Kyiv, haven’t taken Odesa, and have pulled back to the East. I would find it hard to believe that they have any boots on the ground in Moldova or, if they did, that they aren’t all dead by now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_military_presence_in_Transnistria

They've had boots on the ground in Transnistria since 1992. 

Quote

The operational group was as of June 2019 commanded by Colonel Dmitry Zelenkov of Russia and numbered 1,500 troops. It serves alongside the Joint Control Commission.

...

To this day, Moldova continues requesting the withdrawal of the Russian troops from Transnistria, having done so as recently as in 2021.

 

[WhatTheBuck 28705]

4 minutes ago, Pods said:

Transnistria

Oh, right right right. I think that’s a different subject. That’s sort of an inherited situation. Is there combat going on there? I don’t think Putin’s designs on Moldova are limited to an already occupied sliver of their territory anymore than they’re limited to just the Donbas and Crimea in Ukraine. He wants to rebuild the Soviet empire. 

[Pods 7526]

3 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Oh, right right right. I think that’s a different subject. That’s sort of an inherited situation. Is there combat going on there? I don’t think Putin’s designs on Moldova are limited to an already occupied sliver of their territory anymore than they’re limited to just the Donbas and Crimea in Ukraine. He wants to rebuild the Soviet empire. 

Oh, Putin definitely isn't satisfied with only Transnistria and "Colonel" Lukashenko tipped their intent with the map he stupidly showed.

You're right that Putin wants to rebuild an Empire, but it's the Russian Empire he's obsessed with. It may sound like a minor distinction, but it's not minor to Putin.  

The Soviet Empire had room for other ethnic groups. For example, Stalin was Georgian.

Putin believes the Russian Empire should be ruled by Russians and the other ethnic groups in their vicinity should be subservient, or dead.

He wants to be Tsar, not a leader of Commissars.  

[Chad Fuck 17551]

49 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I haven’t heard that. I know that’s a goal. President Lukashenko of Belarus revealed that Moldova was in their game plan weeks ago and I just heard something about it again today on Morning Joe. But the Russians failed to take Kyiv, haven’t taken Odesa, and have pulled back to the East. I would find it hard to believe that they have any boots on the ground in Moldova or, if they did, that they aren’t all dead by now.

Yeah, pretty sure it was in this thread that we saw Russian vehicles being painted with a certain tactical symbol (not "Z" but some other equivalent) and there were concerns of an attempted link up coming east out of Transnistria.

[Chad Fuck 17551]

26 minutes ago, Pods said:

Oh, Putin definitely isn't satisfied with only Transnistria and "Colonel" Lukashenko tipped their intent with the map he stupidly showed.

You're right that Putin wants to rebuild an Empire, but it's the Russian Empire he's obsessed with. It may sound like a minor distinction, but it's not minor to Putin.  

The Soviet Empire had room for other ethnic groups. For example, Stalin was Georgian.

Putin believes the Russian Empire should be ruled by Russians and the other ethnic groups in their vicinity should be subservient, or dead.

He wants to be Tsar, not a leader of Commissars.  

Yes, all of this right here.  

Also, fuck that asshole.

[WhatTheBuck 28705]

41 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Yeah, pretty sure it was in this thread that we saw Russian vehicles being painted with a certain tactical symbol (not "Z" but some other equivalent) and there were concerns of an attempted link up coming east out of Transnistria.

The point was about expansion. When Lukashenko revealed plans for Moldova, it wasn’t about maintaining the status quo.

But I confess I’m sort of itching for a fight, especially after seeing how shitty the Russian military is, and hearing about mass graves in Mariupol where the bodies of thousands of civilians are buried. Sounds like 9,000 is the conservative estimate. I’m sure across the country it amounts to 10’s of thousands of civilians, including women, children, and the elderly, murdered in cold blood. So if Moldova wants to say, let’s get these Russians out of here, I’d be down with that.

[Gil Bang 25896]

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 hours ago, Hookah Horns said:

In Moldova I could see them doing that thing where they send in a bunch of plain clothes soldiers to play separatist. 

Much of your post confuses me though. How would attacking Moldova be aggression against NATO? Moldova isn't in NATO. 

Because Moldova insists upon itself ?

[TXSG8R 3360]

20 hours ago, bangkok said:

well, fuck i've been about as anti-escalation as any of you, but i'm starting to lean towards the other side, especially considering putin's now very clear incompetence and obvious war crimes.

he's weaker now than a few weeks ago.

maybe a brief but decisive, nato-backed escalation limits loss of life and ends the war more quickly.

and if we can limit loss of life as much as possible, i'm pro-that.

i think we're nearing a point of that being most reasonable, rather than allowing this to drag on indefinitely.

looking at the other side, what would putin do? absolute worst case, launch nukes. 

as horrific as that would be, thats a losing scenario for putin, too. and it's a very long shot.

the chance seems small enough to just round up nato, declare we're protecting nato interests and we've seen enough of this bullshit. and i'd give them fair warning - get the fuck out or we'll fuck you up. 

gave him a choice first, go home and you can propagandize some sort of bullshit to save face or we'll crush you.

see more benefits to this now than drawbacks.

Being weaker conventionally makes an unconventional response more likely, not less. I wouldn’t try to make rational calculations for someone that hasn’t acted rationally most of his time in power. Russia’s doctrine is that a tactical nuke is their reset button in an escalating situation, especially with the west. Putin would rather drop nukes than lose face, especially domestically. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33833]

fuck Putin

 

[tx 3 putt 76309]

On 4/21/2022 at 1:32 PM, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

Tom Cotton can fuck all the way off

 

[brakeman 28226]

I like the intelligence and multiple points of view in this thread. We only speak in small talk to our family that are in Russia now.

This war sucks.

 

@HannaLiubakova

 

Belarusian photographer Pavel Krychko created a portrait of Putin from 1,500 screenshots and photos of 57 days of the war in Ukraine. “Horror, pain, suffering, death, inhumanity, evil-all of it is in this image. I don't understand how people can support this,” he says.

 

 

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, brakeman said:

I like the intelligence and multiple points of view in this thread. We only speak in small talk to our family that are in Russia now.

This war sucks.

 

@HannaLiubakova

 

Belarusian photographer Pavel Krychko created a portrait of Putin from 1,500 screenshots and photos of 57 days of the war in Ukraine. “Horror, pain, suffering, death, inhumanity, evil-all of it is in this image. I don't understand how people can support this,” he says.

 

 

 

That is one of the most powerful images I've ever seen.

[brakeman 28226]

And this guy.❤️

 

[cactusflinthead 27594]

 

[SKJ 1305]

Of course he did. 

Orange cocksucker

[UTGrad98 2257]

37 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

 

The worse this war gets the more I think it's impossible he runs for president again. I mean the democrats are smart enough to play shit like this on a loop during the general election aren't they? 

[Sawbonz 27396]

On 4/22/2022 at 8:07 AM, WhatTheBuck said:

I suppose one question is, what if Putin does try to invade Moldova? Obviously any Russian troops on Moldovan soil would be fair game. But what about the Russian Navy in the Black Sea? Wouldn’t that make them aggressors against NATO too? Wouldn’t the supply lines running through Ukraine become aggressors against NATO too? We would kick the shit out of those incompetent bastards so hard.

Hell, the Ukrainians took down the Russian flagship in the Black Sea with a couple of missiles. I heard several weeks ago that we were sending a carrier group to the region. I assume we have a stealth submarine in the area keeping an eye on things. Step one inch into Moldova and I think that would be legitimate justification to sink the Russian fleet in the Black Sea at the very least. 

How many ships does russia have in the Black Sea? They cannot add more

[Brisketexan 104548]

 

He wouldn’t protect THEM from Russia?

FFS, he wouldn’t protect US from Russia. He was and is, literally, a Russian asset - whether intentional or simply because he is a psychotic, easily duped narcissist, it really doesn’t matter.

[WhatTheBuck 28705]

1 hour ago, Sawbonz said:

How many ships does russia have in the Black Sea? They cannot add more

Two fewer than they used to have. That’s all I know.