Jump to content

Ukraine War

BehoId, The Underminer!

By BehoId, The Underminer!
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 9.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Horn Dog
Horn Dog

So our brain dead, demented president has managed to, without firing 1 shot, or risking 1 American life, and with the extremely limited tools at his disposal to respond to a mad man hell bent on irrat

BearSchlong
BearSchlong

The Biden 82nd airborne pizza eating photo? My son is in this photo.

cactusflinthead
cactusflinthead

Posted Images

Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28596

Posted
Posted



lol these olds crack me up

Steve had to take a pee.

Rob and Susan are in the car and Susan needs to learn about angles. No one wants to look up your nose.

Chris needs someone to help him pick a better background.

I’d like to see more of Amy’s furnishings.

Steny needs his aide right beside him.

RICHARD’S iPad in all caps.

Joe (or JM3 lol) apparently lives in the shitty guesthouse of Tony Stewart’s Bass Pro Shop.

Angus has some snow activities on the schedule later.

And there’s entirely too much oak in their homes/offices.
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
F250

F250 28679

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

Yeah, I fail to see how this helps.   If somebody can explain to me why this matters, I'd appreciate it.

These pimply fucks should stick to hacking government/defense shit. 

Once you have account and password data for all those emails you start scraping it for other account information within the email accounts. A lot of people are dumb enough to store work account info in their free personal email accounts. Plus people use it for storing passwords.

This information can be used to pivot to exposed work accounts.

It's a treasure trove of information.

 

Edited by F250
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 29775

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Chopper said:

Yeah, when there's significant anti-artillery on the ground trying to establish a NFZ would be a costly mistake for both the personnel and aircraft you put in the air.

Maybe someone has already posted this opinion, but a No-fly Zone is just a way to announce you are assuming absolute air superiority.

For all practical purposes, we establish NFZs over all the countries we fight or invade within hours of hostilities and with no presence on the ground beneath those skies. Iraq had an airforce in both conflicts. They had no impact on the skies.

What one must be able to do is attack anti-aircraft installations and vehicles with impunity. Necessarily, a NFZ means that the air power involved will indeed attack ground forces to eliminate risk to aircraft wherever possible.

When I mused about filling the skies with NATO & US planes, I included telling the Russian ground forces they would be allowed to retreat towards their border and that we would avoid engaging unarmed troop carriers. The ground threat must be eliminated and we have specialized anti-radar weapons and jamming devices for doing so.

I've generally not asserted we should attack from the air. I'm just not sure. We all see the situation and think some immediate action should be taken. We're not privy to intelligence or even the strategic options considered by command.

They know more about the supply problem the Russians are having and also have a better picture of Russian morale. The best move for the moment could be to let the Russians bleed stuck on the muddy roads of Ukraine. Do we have a strategy for disrupting their logistics at a critical moment through cyber attack, covert means, or employment of Ukrainian forces? There could be decisive possibilities we don't know about.

I do like that we don't hear John Wayne cowboy swagger coming from our decision makers and leader (Biden). Our voice is measured and determined. It's that posturing bullshit that leads up to disastrous foreign and war policies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
NWBuck

NWBuck 8547

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
36 minutes ago, Caponata said:

Love it when multi-millionaires tell the poors who can barely make ends meet they need to sacrifice

Dude survived his family being sent to camps in our country following Executive Order 9066.

He can have an opinion.

  • Hook 'Em 16
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DDD Dad

DDD Dad 14250

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

 

 


lol these olds crack me up

Steve had to take a pee.

Rob and Susan are in the car and Susan needs to learn about angles. No one wants to look up your nose.

Chris needs someone to help him pick a better background.

I’d like to see more of Amy’s furnishings.

Steny needs his aide right beside him.

RICHARD’S iPad in all caps.

Joe (or JM3 lol) apparently lives in the shitty guesthouse of Tony Stewart’s Bass Pro Shop.

Angus has some snow activities on the schedule later.

And there’s entirely too much oak in their homes/offices.

 

Wish one of them had a cat avatar. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gil Bang

Gil Bang 25897

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Let them eat wocka-molay. George Takei 3/5/22

FIFY

32 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Maybe someone has already posted this opinion, but a No-fly Zone is just a way to announce you are assuming absolute air superiority.

For all practical purposes, we establish NFZs over all the countries we fight or invade within hours of hostilities and with no presence on the ground beneath those skies. Iraq had an airforce in both conflicts. They had no impact on the skies.

What one must be able to do is attack anti-aircraft installations and vehicles with impunity. Necessarily, a NFZ means that the air power involved will indeed attack ground forces to eliminate risk to aircraft wherever possible.

When I mused about filling the skies with NATO & US planes, I included telling the Russian ground forces they would be allowed to retreat towards their border and that we would avoid engaging unarmed troop carriers. The ground threat must be eliminated and we have specialized anti-radar weapons and jamming devices for doing so.

I've generally not asserted we should attack from the air. I'm just not sure. We all see the situation and think some immediate action should be taken. We're not privy to intelligence or even the strategic options considered by command.

They know more about the supply problem the Russians are having and also have a better picture of Russian morale. The best move for the moment could be to let the Russians bleed stuck on the muddy roads of Ukraine. Do we have a strategy for disrupting their logistics at a critical moment through cyber attack, covert means, or employment of Ukrainian forces? There could be decisive possibilities we don't know about.

I do like that we don't hear John Wayne cowboy swagger coming from our decision makers and leader (Biden). Our voice is measured and determined. It's that posturing bullshit that leads up to disastrous foreign and war policies.

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
927 E. 41st

927 E. 41st 1124

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Maybe someone has already posted this opinion, but a No-fly Zone is just a way to announce you are assuming absolute air superiority.

For all practical purposes, we establish NFZs over all the countries we fight or invade within hours of hostilities and with no presence on the ground beneath those skies. Iraq had an airforce in both conflicts. They had no impact on the skies.

What one must be able to do is attack anti-aircraft installations and vehicles with impunity. Necessarily, a NFZ means that the air power involved will indeed attack ground forces to eliminate risk to aircraft wherever possible.

When I mused about filling the skies with NATO & US planes, I included telling the Russian ground forces they would be allowed to retreat towards their border and that we would avoid engaging unarmed troop carriers. The ground threat must be eliminated and we have specialized anti-radar weapons and jamming devices for doing so.

I've generally not asserted we should attack from the air. I'm just not sure. We all see the situation and think some immediate action should be taken. We're not privy to intelligence or even the strategic options considered by command.

They know more about the supply problem the Russians are having and also have a better picture of Russian morale. The best move for the moment could be to let the Russians bleed stuck on the muddy roads of Ukraine. Do we have a strategy for disrupting their logistics at a critical moment through cyber attack, covert means, or employment of Ukrainian forces? There could be decisive possibilities we don't know about.

I do like that we don't hear John Wayne cowboy swagger coming from our decision makers and leader (Biden). Our voice is measured and determined. It's that posturing bullshit that leads up to disastrous foreign and war policies.

The best thing you pointed out, and is often missed, was that we are not privy to the intel. Without that we all just guessing. 

One thing we could assume that seems to be missed in this particular conversation is that establishing a true No-Fly would involve some air to air combat with the Russian air force. That could easily spiral out of control, so it's a big risk and big commitment. 

I respectfully disagree with you as to "our voice" in this matter. Sometimes being a bit more unpredictable is advantageous. Timing and context are of course key. But announcing you will not intervene three weeks ago removes you from the equation. Since then our "voice" has been meaningless. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chopper

Chopper 17152

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, 927 E. 41st said:

I respectfully disagree with you as to "our voice" in this matter. Sometimes being a bit more unpredictable is advantageous. Timing and context are of course key. But announcing you will not intervene three weeks ago removes you from the equation. Since then our "voice" has been meaningless. 

While we're seeing horrible civilian casualties those aren't from Russian planes - they're from russian troops on the ground firing artillery and rockets.

We didn't say we'd never intervene.  But we are coalescing international support to destroy the russian economy, which will hit bottom within 2 months due to all the sanctions.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gil Bang

Gil Bang 25897

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, F250 said:

He sounds worse in that video than the Tweet implies. He uses the Putin narrative then blames the Ukraine for not rolling over.

 

He's the asshole that said Ukraine was irresponsible for defending themselves, that they should have surrendered immediately. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chopper

Chopper 17152

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, F250 said:

He sounds worse in that video than the Tweet implies. He uses the Putin narrative then blames the Ukraine for not rolling over.

 

He and Flynn should soon be in Russia with Snowden. Either that or in a supermax.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chopper

Chopper 17152

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, 927 E. 41st said:

Biden- The United States won’t intervene militarily against Russia if it invades Ukraine.webloc Don't know this site, it's just the first one that popped up. Yes, we told the world we would not intervene. I'm sure that wasn't the only green light in Putin's calculation, but you can bet he was happy to have it.

 

Remind me what both the previous president and his vice president had to say about Putin. And tell me where you think we'd be if they were still "in charge"?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
927 E. 41st

927 E. 41st 1124

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Remind me what both the previous president and his vice president had to say about Putin. And tell me where you think we'd be if they were still "in charge"?

How does that relate to you being uninformed. You said...

 

29 minutes ago, Chopper said:

We didn't say we'd never intervene.

You were incorrect, and are now trying to deflect. There are mistakes going back generations, those mistakes don't make current ones any less egregious.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chopper

Chopper 17152

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, 927 E. 41st said:

How does that relate to you being uninformed. You said...

 

You were incorrect, and are now trying to deflect. There are mistakes going back generations, those mistakes don't make current ones any less egregious.

 

You're overlooking the word NEVER. Pay attention.

edit: and define the word INTERVENE. Because arguably you're wrong in more ways than 1 in just a single sentence.

Edited by Chopper
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chopper

Chopper 17152

Posted
Posted

I was looking for this quote by Putin this morning and just happened across it. Putin, asked in 2007 whether Ukraine would ever be a part of Russia: “Of course not. We don’t want it.…It's quite useless to try to force upon anyone new state structures without the will of the relevant people.”

page 8 https://content.time.com/time/specials/2007/personoftheyear/article/0,28804,1690753_1690757_1695787-8,00.html

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...