Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[elfenix 34,161]

 
The time to do that was 1953
 

Should have told Churchill to fuck off and pay for the royal navy's oil like everyone else.

Sent from my KFMAWI using Tapatalk

[BabaYaga 15,190]

5 minutes ago, Wally Fairway said:

Can somebody start a grades thread already, so all the dorks can move their shit parts out of this one?

[Bateshorn 9,853]

39 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

And? Recently the US deported 12 Russian nationals assigned to the UN whom they accused of spying. They didn't hold them in the country. Like I said, I'm sure there's more to this. I'm just saying on the face of it, it doesn't look like Canada is holding Russia accountable. It looks like something you do when you're at war with another country. Which Canada is not. 

They do have a sizable Ukrainian population, however.

So, not all spies are a like.  The people we deported were people we either knew or suspected to be spies. 
 

These guys were probably sigint or something else that got caught trying to flee and the Canadians are telling the Russians we just caught some of your guys you thought we didn’t know about.

Assuming any of it is true. 

 

[BachelorTrek 2,920]

52 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Shit like this makes me think it's going to be impossible for Putin to keep the truth from the Russian people. He's going to need a lot of gulags.

Siberia is very large. 1,974,313 square miles

Edited March 3, 2022 by BachelorTrek

[Rimbo 25,705]

7 hours ago, dcbc said:

I thought Nicole said he was in Syria, no?

He might have been at the time. I would assume he's moving constantly.

6 hours ago, Scary Stranger said:

Fuck.  They're screwed if they are down to using axes.

3 hours ago, NoName said:

enforcing a no fly zone = killing russian pilots and planes.

if we are going to kill russian pilots and planes, we are entering full scale warfare with Russia - as is the rest of the world no matter if they want to or not. if we are going to do that why the hell would we "just" enforce a no fly zone?

yes, thousands of Ukrainians will die needlessly. while it is unfortunate as hell, they are not part of NATO (and only 54% of UKR people want to join pre this fight), they are not part of the EU - only 58% of people wanted to joint that. 21% of people wanted to join a customs union with RUS+Belarus+Kazakhstan. there is no clear want by the UKR people over time to join either group and ally themselves to Europe or NATO. they JUST requested to join and have their request fast tracked THREE days ago.

this isn't going to fight against Iraq or the Taliban, this is a full hot war against a nominal superpower with nukes. you don't jump into that kind of war over someone who isn't an ally, someone who hasn't joined your alliance and someone who had limited interest in pushing to join the alliance until they were invaded.

going balls to the wall into a nuclear war with the rest of the world against fucking Russia over a country that has had every single opportunity to lean closer to Europe/NATO and has opted not to over the last 30 (!!!) years seems like an iffy choice when there are so many other options.

~250k people have died in the Civil War in Yemen and nobody was interested. somewhere between ~120k and ~150k from 06 to 18 died in the Mexican Drug War. Est 350k have died in the Boko Haram/Islamist fight in Nigeria. ~350k have died in the Syrian Civil War.

don't see you or most others pushing to enter any of those conflicts, which are worse in basically every way for humanity as a whole when it comes to how many folks it has impacted, just because the fucking Ruskies are not on the other side.

 

tl;dr

But don't say again that UA "chose" not to be in NATO while ignoring the circumstances as to why they chose that.

2 hours ago, DaysOff said:

Wait. There was a Superman IV?

It was terrible and we mostly pretend it didn't happen.

2 hours ago, Zonahorn said:

Good riddance

Shame we can't blackball the entire staff from ever working again.

[SL Xpress 7,503]

2 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

Perhaps everyone is too focused on the idea that an American/NATO intervention, without an Article 5 exception, would cause nuclear war to happen?

It's not like Putin is acting rational now. There is absolutely nothing to say that Putin won't use the nuke option even if the US/NATO intervenes after a clear Article 5 breach.

If I'm being included in the everyone, I'd like to clarify.

I'm not saying nuclear war will happen. I do not have a crystal ball. I have no idea what will happen. My personal preference is that we don't take the chance of an open war between NATO and Russia creating the conditions for a nuclear war.

But more importantly what I'm saying is that it doesn't matter what I'm saying. Or what you're saying. Or what the general public is saying. There could be a poll that says 90% of Americans support US troops invading Ukraine to fight the Russians. It still won't happen. This is one of those things where public opinion is immaterial. There simply is no appetite by people making the decisions to risk the possibility of a nuclear war by attacking Russia. They've drawn their line in the sand, and they're trying to be consistent about it as much as possible so there's no misunderstanding on Russia's part. Attack a NATO signatory and all members of NATO will go to war. Outside of that we retain the right to support an embattled country, or to isolate Russia's economy to the extent possible without severe near term damage to energy supplies, but we're never sending troops in.

Everyone gets to post whatever they want. I have no desire to change anyone's mind. My only goal is to help anyone who cares to, to have realistic expectations of what we'll see regarding NATO behavior in the future.

[DigglerontheHoof 20,963]

1 minute ago, SL Xpress said:

If I'm being included in the everyone, I'd like to clarify.

I'm not saying nuclear war will happen. I do not have a crystal ball. I have no idea what will happen. My personal preference is that we don't take the chance of an open war between NATO and Russia creating the conditions for a nuclear war.

But more importantly what I'm saying is that it doesn't matter what I'm saying. Or what you're saying. Or what the general public is saying. There could be a poll that says 90% of Americans support US troops invading Ukraine to fight the Russians. It still won't happen. This is one of those things where public opinion is immaterial. There simply is no appetite by people making the decisions to risk the possibility of a nuclear war by attacking Russia. They've drawn their line in the sand, and they're trying to be consistent about it as much as possible so there's no misunderstanding on Russia's part. Attack a NATO signatory and all members of NATO will go to war. Outside of that we retain the right to support an embattled country, or to isolate Russia's economy to the extent possible without severe near term damage to energy supplies, but we're never sending troops in.

Everyone gets to post whatever they want. I have no desire to change anyone's mind. My only goal is to help anyone who cares to, to have realistic expectations of what we'll see regarding NATO behavior in the future.

In short.  Ukraine is turbo fucked. 

[Trey3216 15,321]

12 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Dude, he is not going to pulverize Kyiv. What point would that serve him? If he is prepared to do that he is prepared for total global thermonuclear war. Maybe he is, but his oligarchs ain't. And even absent nuclear deterrence, what point would that serve? He'd be universally reviled abroad and widely reviled at home. It's just not happening. 

[BabaYaga 15,190]

2 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

If I'm being included in the everyone, I'd like to clarify.

I'm not saying nuclear war will happen. I do not have a crystal ball. I have no idea what will happen. My personal preference is that we don't take the chance of an open war between NATO and Russia creating the conditions for a nuclear war.

But more importantly what I'm saying is that it doesn't matter what I'm saying. Or what you're saying. Or what the general public is saying. There could be a poll that says 90% of Americans support US troops invading Ukraine to fight the Russians. It still won't happen. This is one of those things where public opinion is immaterial. There simply is no appetite by people making the decisions to risk the possibility of a nuclear war by attacking Russia. They've drawn their line in the sand, and they're trying to be consistent about it as much as possible so there's no misunderstanding on Russia's part. Attack a NATO signatory and all members of NATO will go to war. Outside of that we retain the right to support an embattled country, or to isolate Russia's economy to the extent possible without severe near term damage to energy supplies, but we're never sending troops in.

Everyone gets to post whatever they want. I have no desire to change anyone's mind. My only goal is to help anyone who cares to, to have realistic expectations of what we'll see regarding NATO behavior in the future.

Yep.  The stakes are too high to risk nuclear war, ESPECIALLY with the UA performing so admirably.  This isn't a Mongol invasion with people being set on fire and launched into cities so their fat would ignite the buildings.  We are doing what the Russians did to us in Vietnam - arming them with the tech needed to defeat a larger, more powerful force

[F250 28,623]

1 hour ago, Zonahorn said:

That giant Russian column is about to get liquidated.

[JerrysJheriCurl 977]

19 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

Still, Carter met with Khomeini and decided he could work with him better because they were both religious.

They want a return of a Caliphate, with a strong preference for Arab hegemony. 

The key issue with Mohammed Bin Salman is that if he's deposed, particularly through some kind of grassroots uprising, we're likelier to see a tilt towards extremism and open war with the West than we are a more peaceful and secular country. 

ههههههههه. واو. خلاص صافي صافي بركة والله

[NeverMarryAStripper 21,780]

2 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Yep.  The stakes are too high to risk nuclear war, ESPECIALLY with the UA performing so admirably.  This isn't a Mongol invasion with people being set on fire and launched into cities so their fat would ignite the buildings.  We are doing what the Russians did to us in Vietnam - arming them with the tech needed to defeat a larger, more powerful force

Except of course they actually had boots on the ground in Vietnam, and possibly pilots on the air

[TexasEd 8,058]

1 hour ago, Doc Reeves said:

That’s their target like a seal is for a Great White. 

Foolish and out date to have multi mile long convoys. Maybe if you’ve got complete air supremacy and support, but even then you leave your ass open to ambush or IED. 

 

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Well, I certainly hope that if encircled in the field, all such Russian troops surrender without being harmed.  Best possible outcome.....

.....but this is what's coming.  And it can't be stopped (by any reasonable means).

Russia is intent on destroying european cities in full view of the world.  By doing so, it forever loses any hint of legitimacy that has helped it make money for the past decades.

 

1 hour ago, crash_davis said:

when the hunters become the hunted. 

there are no winners here. again from the numerous videos, many of the russian troops do not support this shit. lots of innocent lives on both sides are dying. fuck putin.

I read an analysis on Russian tactics (lost the link). Warning: Everything I type below is best case scenario for Russia and that is not likely the case but it could be what the messaging is back to Putin. Edit: Nicole don't read this you'll freak out.

Basically their siege doctrine  says the 40 mile convoy is doing what it is supposed to right now.  They are stopped within range of artillery and MLRS systems at 15KM away and the range of those weapons is 20-25KM.  They should be setting up for high intensity bombardment (maybe that is the threat at the talks today).  They are holding the trucks and troops back because they will not go in until the shelling stops and it is just starting now.

The paratroopers that went in were supposed to hold spots temporarily like refueling stations and airfields and then the airlifts and larger forces come in and take over (this has not been very successful from the reports we are seeing)

So the Russians would not say their column is stalled, they are at their staging point.  The encirclement of Kyiv may be taking longer than expected but it is closing and once it does the full scale bombardment will start.  Ground troops are being held back to clean up after the shelling.

Don't shoot the messenger.  I hope UKr Wolverines can take out some of that artillery overnight.

Edited March 3, 2022 by TexasEd

[Saint Austin 739]

2 minutes ago, F250 said:

!Pero estos son tuyos!

[SL Xpress 7,503]

10 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Dude, he is not going to pulverize Kyiv. What point would that serve him? If he is prepared to do that he is prepared for total global thermonuclear war. Maybe he is, but his oligarchs ain't. And even absent nuclear deterrence, what point would that serve? He'd be universally reviled abroad and widely reviled at home. It's just not happening. 

You don't think they're going to pulverize Kyiv? Really? I think that's exactly what he's going to do. Destroy the city to save it, Vietnam style. Same with Kharkiv. And ESPECIALLY true for Mariupol. He wants regime change way more than he wants Kyiv to remain intact. I'm sure he'd prefer Kyiv to remain intact, hence the special operations to try to secure multiple airfields, and the assassination squads roaming the city, in the opening day of the invasion. 

I don't know how much he cares about being universally reviled, or if he does care, how much he's able to calculate consequences. He was president for the siege of Grozny part 2, and he came out of that just fine. Russian forces did plenty to assist in the flattening of Aleppo, but directly and indirectly with their unwavering support of Assad. My guess is this is part of his reflexes. It's written as standard Russian military doctrine, so they're just following the game plan already drawn up. I don't think he's going to have to think about it a whole lot, actually.

I honestly believe Putin feels like if he can just get a Russian friendly regime installed in Ukraine, with time he can sort out his issues with the West. But if he doesn't sort out Ukraine now, he won't ever be able to, and that's not acceptable to him in any number of ways.

[Brisketexan 104,230]

25 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Dude, he is not going to pulverize Kyiv. What point would that serve him? If he is prepared to do that he is prepared for total global thermonuclear war. Maybe he is, but his oligarchs ain't. And even absent nuclear deterrence, what point would that serve? He'd be universally reviled abroad and widely reviled at home. It's just not happening. 

You are attributing Western rationalization to Putin.  You shouldn't do that.  He's ALREADY universally reviled abroad.  And he's lying at home, and will continue to do so.  The post below is correct.

5 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

You don't think they're going to pulverize Kyiv? Really? I think that's exactly what he's going to do. Destroy the city to save it, Vietnam style. Same with Kharkiv. And ESPECIALLY true for Mariupol. He wants regime change way more than he wants Kyiv to remain intact. I'm sure he'd prefer Kyiv to remain intact, hence the special operations to try to secure multiple airfields, and the assassination squads roaming the city, in the opening day of the invasion. 

I don't know how much he cares about being universally reviled, or if he does care, how much he's able to calculate consequences. He was president for the siege of Grozny part 2, and he came out of that just fine. Russian forces did plenty to assist in the flattening of Aleppo, but directly and indirectly with their unwavering support of Assad. My guess is this is part of his reflexes. It's written as standard Russian military doctrine, so they're just following the game plan already drawn up. I don't think he's going to have to think about it a whole lot, actually.

I honestly believe Putin feels like if he can just get a Russian friendly regime installed in Ukraine, with time he can sort out his issues with the West. But if he doesn't sort out Ukraine now, he won't ever be able to, and that's not acceptable to him in any number of ways.

 

[MaybeACoordinator 8,349]

12 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

You don't think they're going to pulverize Kyiv? Really? I think that's exactly what he's going to do. Destroy the city to save it, Vietnam style. Same with Kharkiv. And ESPECIALLY true for Mariupol. He wants regime change way more than he wants Kyiv to remain intact. I'm sure he'd prefer Kyiv to remain intact, hence the special operations to try to secure multiple airfields, and the assassination squads roaming the city, in the opening day of the invasion. 

I don't know how much he cares about being universally reviled, or if he does care, how much he's able to calculate consequences. He was president for the siege of Grozny part 2, and he came out of that just fine. Russian forces did plenty to assist in the flattening of Aleppo, but directly and indirectly with their unwavering support of Assad. My guess is this is part of his reflexes. It's written as standard Russian military doctrine, so they're just following the game plan already drawn up. I don't think he's going to have to think about it a whole lot, actually.

I honestly believe Putin feels like if he can just get a Russian friendly regime installed in Ukraine, with time he can sort out his issues with the West. But if he doesn't sort out Ukraine now, he won't ever be able to, and that's not acceptable to him in any number of ways.

Grozny and Aleppo are like shithole Mexican cities to the average Russian. Kiev is like a combo of Rome and San Antonio to patriotic and religious Russians (analogy works best if you are an Anglo Texas Catholic).

I am not saying he isn't bombing it but he is not going to lay it waste Dresden style. Whatever he does will be as "surgical" as Russians can get. And as for occupying it, it will be another Green Zone type thing. He can't hold the whole city. I am sure there are some petty pro-Russian warlords in the vicinity he can stir up but he can't go in there and put the whole metro on lock. And he can't engineer a humanitarian crisis to the extent he might like so long as food and medicine and opportunities to flee exist on the western border.

Meanwhile he's encountering all that resistance in the south and east....he can't properly occupy those cities either. He's kinda fucked. Not Nazi 6th Army at Stalingrad fucked but kinda close.

 

[VABuckeye 2,472]

27 minutes ago, JerrysJheriCurl said:

ههههههههه. واو. خلاص صافي صافي بركة والله

I agree.

What did you say again?

[Ag with kids 579]

1 hour ago, SL Xpress said:

Did they question whether they'd be allowed to actually go out on operations because the commanding officer was too scared of losing one?

This is extra funny for me since I used to work for Bell and worked with a lot of Cobra pilots there and they made comments like this all the time.

[Buzzrock 14,859]

Good point. Cable News gets a hardon for war.

They haven’t had ratings this good in a long time.

[The Dog 43,716]

All I know is I'm paying attention to what's happening to that convoy and the now cut off Russians due west of Kyiv.

[BachelorTrek 2,920]

Another T-90 #Wasted, GTA-style!

[TexasEd 8,058]

8 minutes ago, The Dog said:

All I know is I'm paying attention to what's happening to that convoy and the now cut off Russians due west of Kyiv.

yeah, read this post:

34 minutes ago, TexasEd said:

 

 

I read an analysis on Russian tactics (lost the link). Warning: Everything I type below is best case scenario for Russia and that is not likely the case but it could be what the messaging is back to Putin. Edit: Nicole don't read this you'll freak out.

Basically their siege doctrine  says the 40 mile convoy is doing what it is supposed to right now.  They are stopped within range of artillery and MLRS systems at 15KM away and the range of those weapons is 20-25KM.  They should be setting up for high intensity bombardment (maybe that is the threat at the talks today).  They are holding the trucks and troops back because they will not go in until the shelling stops and it is just starting now.

The paratroopers that went in were supposed to hold spots temporarily like refueling stations and airfields and then the airlifts and larger forces come in and take over (this has not been very successful from the reports we are seeing)

So the Russians would not say their column is stalled, they are at their staging point.  The encirclement of Kyiv may be taking longer than expected but it is closing and once it does the full scale bombardment will start.  Ground troops are being held back to clean up after the shelling.

Don't shoot the messenger.  I hope UKr Wolverines can take out some of that artillery overnight.

I think this is the key.  Is it the plan to stage the convoy there for shelling or is it really a stalled column.

 

[Ag with kids 579]

1 hour ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Having spent a week or so in Yellowknife, this is a war crime to hold them there.. 

My former company did cold weather flight testing for a helicopter certification up there.  I was SO glad I wasn't on the program anymore.  They were pissed because they needed it to be below -45 degF to do the testing and it took a week before it dipped from -42 or so to below -45...so they had to stay there the whole fucking time waiting before they could fly.

BTW, the non-production aircraft did NOT have heaters...

[The Dog 43,716]

1 minute ago, TexasEd said:

yeah, read this post:

I think this is the key.  Is it the plan to stage the convoy there for shelling or is it really a stalled column.

 

The Ukrainians have been blowing that convoy to hell today. It wasn't supposed to stop. 

Also, the Russians would need air superiority in order to execute the siege doctrine. They're sitting ducks instead.

[The Dog 43,716]

 

[Doc Reeves 6,434]

Just now, The Dog said:

They're sitting ducks instead.

 

don’t know why but i read that as “They’re sucking dicks instead” 

Either away, amirite

[Buzzrock 14,859]

Dude, he is not going to pulverize Kyiv. What point would that serve him? If he is prepared to do that he is prepared for total global thermonuclear war. Maybe he is, but his oligarchs ain't. And even absent nuclear deterrence, what point would that serve? He'd be universally reviled abroad and widely reviled at home. It's just not happening. 

I’m not sure where you’re getting that logic. He could flatten Kyiv and roll in and take Ukraine back and no NATO nation would do shit besides condemnations and (maybe) real sanctions against energy. No one is going to war with Russia over Ukraine.

That’s why it’s borderline immoral to keep encouraging Ukraine to fight when no other nation is going to send a single troop to fight with them. It’s a suicide mission. All efforts should be focused on stopping the war. I’m behind again due to a busy week at work, but last I saw the demands were to recognize Russian control of Crimea (everyone knows this is already the case), guarantee Ukraine will never join NATO (fine, do that for now) and some sort of vague de-Nazification of Ukraine. That seems like a better option than to continue fighting an unwinnable war and putting every remaining Ukrainian under threat of horrible death and making millions into permanent refugees.

Putin won’t live forever. He’s already past the life expectancy of your average Russian. Stop the war, hold some western diplomats accountable for this colossal fuck up, and start treating Putin like the murderous thug he is instead of a global trade partner.

I’d love to be wrong about Ukraine’s chances in a fight but I just don’t believe it’s rational to think they can beat Russia.

[SL Xpress 7,503]

13 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Grozny and Aleppo are like shithole Mexican cities to the average Russian. Kiev is like a combo of Rome and San Antonio to patriotic and religious Russians (analogy works best if you are an Anglo Texas Catholic).

I am not saying he isn't bombing it but he is not going to lay it waste Dresden style. Whatever he does will be as "surgical" as Russians can get. And as for occupying it, it will be another Green Zone type thing. He can't hold the whole city. I am sure there are some petty pro-Russian warlords in the vicinity he can stir up but he can't go in there and put the whole metro on lock. And he can't engineer a humanitarian crisis to the extent he might like so long as food and medicine and opportunities to flee exist on the western border.

Meanwhile he's encountering all that resistance in the south and east....he can't properly occupy those cities either. He's kinda fucked. Not Nazi 6th Army at Stalingrad fucked but kinda close.

 

I agree with everything you said other than your main conclusion. I feel quite confident Putin is going to order Kyiv to be leveled to a significant degree. It’s already started. 

One of the key lessons he learned with Grozny and Aleppo is that he won. 

I don’t know what a good analogy is for Kyiv. I’ve brought up Plymouth Rock. I’ve thought about Jerusalem to Jews during the diaspora. Or even to Europeans during the Crusades. But those aren’t accurate. Especially since Ukrainians are seen as part of the same culture. The average Russian is absolutely certain Russia is invading to liberate suppressed Ukrainians from their neo Nazi overlords.

There’s just not a real good equivalent. But I’m still convinced it’s going to be shelled mercilessly. 

[SL Xpress 7,503]

8 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

I’m not sure where you’re getting that logic. He could flatten Kyiv and roll in and take Ukraine back and no NATO nation would do shit besides condemnations and (maybe) real sanctions against energy. No one is going to war with Russia over Ukraine.

That’s why it’s borderline immoral to keep encouraging Ukraine to fight when no other nation is going to send a single troop to fight with them. It’s a suicide mission. All efforts should be focused on stopping the war. I’m behind again due to a busy week at work, but last I saw the demands were to recognize Russian control of Crimea (everyone knows this is already the case), guarantee Ukraine will never join NATO (fine, do that for now) and some sort of vague de-Nazification of Ukraine. That seems like a better option than to continue fighting an unwinnable war and putting every remaining Ukrainian under threat of horrible death and making millions into permanent refugees.

Putin won’t live forever. He’s already past the life expectancy of your average Russian. Stop the war, hold some western diplomats accountable for this colossal fuck up, and start treating Putin like the murderous thug he is instead of a global trade partner.

I’d love to be wrong about Ukraine’s chances in a fight but I just don’t believe it’s rational to think they can beat Russia.

The de-Nazification is code for a Russian friendly regime. Any leaning towards Europe is seen as the work of neo-Nazis. Not saying there aren’t neo Nazi elements in Ukraine, because there are. But they’re constantly exaggerated by Russia for domestic propaganda purposes. 

I don’t know what the latest demands are in the peace talks. If I was in charge of Ukraine I would be hesitant to sign any agreement that limited my country’s ability to defend itself through either arms purchases or military alliances, while I have a neighbor’s invading army in my country who already signed a memorandum saying they’d protect our sovereignty. 

[Ghost of LL 15,327]

16 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

That’s why it’s borderline immoral to keep encouraging Ukraine to fight when no other nation is going to send a single troop to fight with them. It’s a suicide mission. All efforts should be focused on stopping the war.

You know--I hear you on this.  

And then I remember that Ivan Drago is Ukrainian.  And I kind of think to myself, "is it really that bad of a thing if Russians and Ukrainians are killing one another?".

[Bateshorn 9,853]

12 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

I agree with everything you said other than your main conclusion. I feel quite confident Putin is going to order Kyiv to be leveled to a significant degree. It’s already started. 

One of the key lessons he learned with Grozny and Aleppo is that he won. 

I don’t know what a good analogy is for Kyiv. I’ve brought up Plymouth Rock. I’ve thought about Jerusalem to Jews during the diaspora. Or even to Europeans during the Crusades. But those aren’t accurate. Especially since Ukrainians are seen as part of the same culture. The average Russian is absolutely certain Russia is invading to liberate suppressed Ukrainians from their neo Nazi overlords.

There’s just not a real good equivalent. But I’m still convinced it’s going to be shelled mercilessly. 

Culloden. He’s gonna slaughter the Ukrainians the same way the English enforced the Clearances, assuming he can pull it off. 
 

Unlike George 3, he doesn’t have 1/3 the Scottish lords in bed with him.
 

 

Edited March 3, 2022 by Bateshorn

[Constant 6,696]

29 minutes ago, BachelorTrek said:

Another T-90 #Wasted, GTA-style!

They really, really suck at protecting their armor.  

[TexasEd 8,058]

30 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

I’m not sure where you’re getting that logic. He could flatten Kyiv and roll in and take Ukraine back and no NATO nation would do shit besides condemnations and (maybe) real sanctions against energy. No one is going to war with Russia over Ukraine.

That’s why it’s borderline immoral to keep encouraging Ukraine to fight when no other nation is going to send a single troop to fight with them. It’s a suicide mission. All efforts should be focused on stopping the war. I’m behind again due to a busy week at work, but last I saw the demands were to recognize Russian control of Crimea (everyone knows this is already the case), guarantee Ukraine will never join NATO (fine, do that for now) and some sort of vague de-Nazification of Ukraine. That seems like a better option than to continue fighting an unwinnable war and putting every remaining Ukrainian under threat of horrible death and making millions into permanent refugees.

Putin won’t live forever. He’s already past the life expectancy of your average Russian. Stop the war, hold some western diplomats accountable for this colossal fuck up, and start treating Putin like the murderous thug he is instead of a global trade partner.

I’d love to be wrong about Ukraine’s chances in a fight but I just don’t believe it’s rational to think they can beat Russia.

1. I think Zelensky has been up front on the risks of death, realistic about the help he can get, and said that what they value is worth dying for.  He was offered asylum and he chose the Patriot's path.  So encouraging them to fight on is where we are.

2. The longer the war takes the shorter Putin's lifespan is part of the equation

3. It's not about beating Russia it is about not letting Russia win. A stalemate is victory for Ukraine because Russia will fold

4. De-Nazification means putting a Putin puppet in charge.  Ukraine is solidly against that now.

Edited March 3, 2022 by TexasEd

[pantone159 712]

32 minutes ago, TexasEd said:

Is it the plan to stage the convoy there for shelling or is it really a stalled column.

I suspect that this '40 mile long' convoy is gradually transforming into a 40 mile long obstacle course composed of broken down/wrecked/stalled vehicles. And since the mud is impassable for heavy vehicles, every single thing the Russians want to send towards Kyiv will need to make its way through these obstacles.

[MillerEP 30,311]

Umm, how about we NOT bomb Nuclear plants guys!?

Edited March 3, 2022 by MillerEP

[SL Xpress 7,503]

12 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Culloden. He’s gonna slaughter the Ukrainians the same way the English enforced the Clearances, assuming he can pull it off. 
 

Unlike George 3, he doesn’t have 1/3 the Scottish lords in bed with him.
 

 

That’s a great historical reference. 
 

I will say, Putin thought he did. 

[Bobby_Batronic 1,994]

17 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

The de-Nazification is code for a Russian friendly regime. Any leaning towards Europe is seen as the work of neo-Nazis. Not saying there aren’t neo Nazi elements in Ukraine, because there are. But they’re constantly exaggerated by Russia for domestic propaganda purposes. 

The Great Patriotic War still casts a long shadow in the minds of Russians. It’s the easiest and, frankly, laziest way to sell this war to his populace and politicos. 

Edited March 3, 2022 by Bobby_Batronic

[Longhornlove 4,773]

2 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

 

Supposedly killed by a sniper.

[RockyMountainHighHorn 888]

3 minutes ago, pantone159 said:

I suspect that this '40 mile long' convoy is gradually transforming into a 40 mile long obstacle course composed of broken down/wrecked/stalled vehicles. And since the mud is impassable for heavy vehicles, every single thing the Russians want to send towards Kyiv will need to make its way through these obstacles.

See I want to believe that but then every morning I wake up and it’s somehow longer and more deadly and just stalking. I’m torn.

[Doc Reeves 6,434]

2 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

That’s a great historical reference. 

Indeed.

 

[TexasEd 8,058]

3 minutes ago, Doc Reeves said:

Indeed.

 

What?

 

😛

 

[Rimbo 25,705]

Just now, TexasEd said:

What?

 

😛

 

SAY WHAT AGAIN MOTHER FUCKER

[Doc Reeves 6,434]

Just now, TexasEd said:

What?

 

😛

 

OH MOTHERFUCKER!!!!!

[atomheartbevo 89,304]

3 hours ago, RDCanecutter said:

We offer to buy the nukes instead.

[Sbbruin 21,690]

3 hours ago, Left Coast said:

User name checks out.  We leave commodities to the middle of the country.

[MillerEP 30,311]

 

[atomheartbevo 89,304]

3 hours ago, TexasEd said:

We laugh (because it's true and funny) but this is what happens when the people you rely on getting stuff done are 1) afraid to tell the boss they need a better plan, 2) Won't stick their neck out to try something different because that is too risky, 3) are too drunk on vodka to really care anymore.

General: I need you to fly sorties. I need to say my units are flying sorties.

Colonel: Yes sir!

Colonel: Captain, you need to fly sorties!

Captain: Yes sir!

Captain: Lieutenant, we are going to fly more sorties!

Lieutenant: But we keep losing helicopters, we should change what we are doing!

Captain: I wasn't told to change plans, I was told to fly sorties.  If you want to discuss it, I'm sure the Colonel can spare some time!

Lieutenant: Going to get the helicopters airborne now!

[SL Xpress 7,503]

5 minutes ago, Bobby_Batronic said:

The Great Patriotic War still casts a long shadow in the minds of Russians. It’s the easiest and, frankly, laziest way to sell this war to his populace and politicos. 

It’s both sides. The western tilting government declared Stepan Bandera a national hero in 2010, whereas other nations view him as a ruthless killer who made accommodations with Hitler in hopes for independence. The mayor of Lyiv suggested calling Molotovs a “Bandera smoothie” just a couple of days ago. 
 

The reason why it’s effective, like all the best propaganda, is not just the emotional weight and loaded terminology. It’s that there’s an element of truth. I don’t know that I would use the words easiest and laziest as much as “effectivest.”

[BrickTop 474]

[/url] Umm, how about we NOT bomb Nuclear plants guys!?

There’s supposedly a massive fire now at that plant