Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[Hook1997 5401]

1 hour ago, Enchubben said:

I think the idea of riding Putin out from within was the best path forward, but that looks increasingly difficult as he clamps down on information from the West and the outpouring of propaganda. I guess I really shouldn’t be surprised that Russians on camera aren’t willing to disparage the war on Ukraine, but these folks seemed to really be bought in. The West really should be trying to figure out a way to overcome the Russian propaganda.

 

There’s on thing about that video, most interviews shown are people over 65…..   It’s also a handful of people and does not represent the population as a whole, especially the younger under 50 crowd.  Sure propaganda is going to work on many but most intelligent people will start to question why their media access is cut off and censorship has gone up.  They won’t just be like damn can’t get on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, ect, for months and just go oh the war that makes sense, go Russia.  It’s not 1980 anymore.  

Edited March 4, 2022 by Hook1997

[DigglerontheHoof 21236]

14 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

You tell me what’s better. Russian police state or what’s going on now and however the fuck the country will look 5-10-15-20 years from now.

obviously I don’t want escalation either but Ukraine will be rocks and debris when it’s done. So you get to fight and spend the rest of your life cleaning up this mess, because this’ll take decades

This is an odd statement from an American.  

[Buzzrock 14941]

17 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

Yes. 100%. It would have to be an insurgency. I don’t think they’ll have a standing army. But Russia has zero chance of any kind of successful occupation or installing a puppet government that can survive a Russian exit. 

Well, I suppose you could be right. But history wouldn’t seem to bear that out. He said he would go into Georgia and Crimea and take them and he did. I don’t see any reason he won’t do the same here. 

[Sgt Hulk 13839]

1 hour ago, Enchubben said:

I think the idea of riding Putin out from within was the best path forward, but that looks increasingly difficult as he clamps down on information from the West and the outpouring of propaganda. I guess I really shouldn’t be surprised that Russians on camera aren’t willing to disparage the war on Ukraine, but these folks seemed to really be bought in. The West really should be trying to figure out a way to overcome the Russian propaganda.

 

A good fuck your mother makes this Russian AF

[Shady Ray 1633]

Mr. McAdams will apparently have the chance to speak.

 

 

 

[Buzzrock 14941]

17 minutes ago, NoName said:

dude, come on.

there is no reason for Putin to turn Kyiv and the rest of the country into Grozny circa 1995. if he wanted the country destroyed they would have handled the initial invasion much, much differently.

 

So your logic is that he won’t do something that he’s done before?

When are we going to treat this guy like the murderous thug that he keeps showing us that he is?

”I’m sorry baby, I won’t hit you again. Give me just one more chance.”

[Parliament 14296]

5 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

Mr. McAdams will apparently have the chance to speak.

 

 

 

Good to see him have a sense of humor.  Hopefully he lets himself get dunked on when they do their show.

[SL Xpress 7518]

4 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

Well, I suppose you could be right. But history wouldn’t seem to bear that out. He said he would go into Georgia and Crimea and take them and he did. I don’t see any reason he won’t do the same here. 

He didn’t take Georgia. He took a small sliver of Georgia. 

Crimea historically is the home to the Tartars. Stalin had them deported en masse to Siberia in a Trail of Tears type operation then gave generous incentives to ethnic Russians to move there and take their lands and homes. In 1954 Khrushchev took Crimea from Russia Soviet Socialist Republic and gave it to Ukraine Soviet Socialist Republic in what at the time and subsequently was viewed as a mistake by much of the rest of Russian leadership. The people living in Crimea have for the most part never thought of themselves as Ukrainians. 

Maybe the reaction the Ukrainians are showing is false bravado, and when push comes to shove they fold and quit offering up resistance. But that isn’t what I saw during the Orange Revolution in 2005. That isn’t what I saw during the Maidan Revolution in 2014, and that’s certainly not what I’m seeing right now. 

I’d argue history shows how difficult it is to pacify a population that has a willingness to fight. It’s especially difficult when an insurgency has a sponsor, they have terrain like the Carpathian Mountains in the west, and they have sympathetic bordering nations for supplies to flow through. But above all there has to be a willingness to fight. 

I’d also say the troop count for an occupation force is absurdly low, regardless of their successes or failures on the battlefield. And that’s skipping over all the incompetencies we’ve seen demonstrated. 

[KYHorn 17158]

On 3/1/2022 at 6:48 PM, MonkeyDoughnut said:

The 800 number is rounding up pretty heavily I think... but since they used "up to" ... could be 1 or 2 as well.

It took 3 days but I finally caught back up. I still managed to get up to 800 hours of work in!

[formermav43 4606]

25 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

Well, I suppose you could be right. But history wouldn’t seem to bear that out. 

Yeah, when has an insurgency every held out for years against a foreign invader? 

[Buzzrock 14941]

8 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

He didn’t take Georgia. He took a small sliver of Georgia. 

Crimea historically is the home to the Tartars. Stalin had them deported en masse to Siberia in a Trail of Tears type operation then gave generous incentives to ethnic Russians to move there and take their lands and homes. In 1954 Khrushchev took Crimea from Russia Soviet Socialist Republic and gave it to Ukraine Soviet Socialist Republic in what at the time and subsequently was viewed as a mistake by much of the rest of Russian leadership. The people living in Crimea have for the most part never thought of themselves as Ukrainians. 

Maybe the reaction the Ukrainians are showing is false bravado, and when push comes to shove they fold and quit offering up resistance. But that isn’t what I saw during the Orange Revolution in 2005. That isn’t what I saw during the Maidan Revolution in 2014, and that’s certainly not what I’m seeing right now. 

I’d argue history shows how difficult it is to pacify a population that has a willingness to fight. It’s especially difficult when an insurgency has a sponsor, they have terrain like the Carpathian Mountains in the west, and they have sympathetic bordering nations for supplies to flow through. But above all there has to be a willingness to fight. 

I’d also say the troop count for an occupation force is absurdly low, regardless of their successes or failures on the battlefield. And that’s skipping over all the incompetencies we’ve seen demonstrated. 

I’m not an expert but you’re comparing political protest actions to a full scale military invasion. That’s like bringing a picket sign to a thermobaric rocket fight. 

[troph 24905]

4 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

This apparently is the video referenced in the tweets earlier.  It was Ukrainian special ops folks ambushing some airborne and possibly Chechnyan forces   Many of the airborne’s vehicles are fucking aluminum for weight purposes but aluminum don’t do so well with heat   

Seriously NSFW

HO-Lee… seriously NSTW.  They are demolishing the Russians when they have the opportunity. Wow.

[Constant 6755]

 

[Scary Stranger 1715]

Go Unions! 
 

It doesn’t mention that this is just an extension of them not unloading anyone’s shit at the port for months now. They’re on a smoke break.

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3868]

28 minutes ago, NoName said:

are you are saying that because there is a nuclear power involved we should be MORE active than if one wasn't?

re: power plant fire:

was it dumb? for sure.

that said, what's more likely? russian forces were trying to take over a power plant that provides ~20% of power to Ukranians and turn it off OR that they are trying to melt it down, and have the wind blow the contamination south and east into Russian controlled areas and into Mother Russia itself?

https://www.windy.com/47.851/35.118?46.762,33.536,6,m:eYUag7G

Or just plain old propaganda for the folks back home that RU has to send their sons to keep the reactor safe so we don't see a bigger Chernobyl.

It appears the 'stuck' convoy was supposed to rendezvous with troops flown into Hostomel to quickly over take Kyiv, via shock and awe, so RU didn't have to amass the number of troops on the border that would make it obvious there was a much larger objective.  If the confidence was high enough that RU minimally staffed the convoy it could explain why our military pundits are mystified on why they are 3 across stuck. It may be the equivalent of circling the wagons for defense.  https://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-thought-ukraine-would-fall-quickly-an-airport-battle-proved-him-wrong-11646343121

[SimonBolivar 10959]

2 hours ago, Doug E. Fresh said:

There is no way the conventional Russian military is being used up in this war. There are plenty of Russian troops, tanks, artillery and more importantly aircraft available to move on to the next target. Their ability to successfully deploy their military is certainly in doubt, but the numbers are clearly there.

 

Yes they've produced that many tanks and other systems but in what condition are they in? We've seen the paltry condition of their mobilized equipment so you have to imagine the stuff in reserve is even worse.

 

I was reading Midnight in Chernobyl a few weeks back and he mentioned how in the Soviet Era corruption was so bad that every part that was sent to Chernobyl had to be broken down to its smallest component and then rebuilt. This was because those building the parts were more likely to forget a piece than deliver their product intact.

 

I dont think the culture of corruption has improved all that much in 30 years.

Edited March 4, 2022 by SimonBolivar

[Neonmoon 38130]

46 minutes ago, NoName said:

dude, come on.

there is no reason for Putin to turn Kyiv and the rest of the country into Grozny circa 1995. if he wanted the country destroyed they would have handled the initial invasion much, much differently.

 

You keep ignoring actual evidence to the contrary of your opinion 

 

[Dahobbs 17681]

40 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

This is an odd statement from an American.  

To be fair, it's an American that has lost mind over the last 2 years. Telling someone they should just accept Russian rule and not fight for their country is not only crazy, it is incredibly arrogant and selfish. I know we would fight here. I don't know why we should expect less of the Ukranians. Unless of course you buy into the Russian bullshit that they are all really Russians anyway. 

Edited March 4, 2022 by Dahobbs

[SL Xpress 7518]

Just now, Buzzrock said:

I’m not an expert but you’re comparing political protest actions to a full scale military invasion. That’s like bringing a picket sign to a thermobaric rocket fight. 

How much do you know about the Maidan Revolution? I’m not trying to say it’s the equivalent to an insurgency, but it also wasn’t a simple protest. The governing president had spent significant sums building out the beginnings of a repressive police force, and they were unleashed on the protesters, including snipers, armored personnel carriers - the works. It wasn’t Allepo, but it wasn’t exactly the Washington Monument, either. 

There’s no telling how they’ll respond. I’m just saying there are plenty of indications they’re ready to fight to the death. Which is good. Because that’s what will happen in the thousands. Possibly the hundreds of thousands. 

[Dahobbs 17681]

31 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

So your logic is that he won’t do something that he’s done before?

When are we going to treat this guy like the murderous thug that he keeps showing us that he is?

”I’m sorry baby, I won’t hit you again. Give me just one more chance.”

Your logic appears to be to just give the murderous thug whatever he wants. I don't see why you think that is better. 

[Constant 6755]

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

To be fair, it's an American that has lost mind over the last 2 years. Telling someone they should just accept Russian rule and not fight for their country is not only crazy, it is incredibly arrogant and selfish. I know we would fight here. I don't know why we should expect less of the Ukranians. Unless of course you buy into the Russian bullshit that they are all really Russians anyway. 

Defending your homeland against a foreign invader is the purest form of motivation for war. It is endless. 

Edited March 4, 2022 by Constant

[SimonBolivar 10959]

There is hope for an internal solution to Putin. 

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/zelensky-survives-three-assassination-attempts-in-days-xnstdfdfc

 

If your own spy agency has people actively helping the enemy then in no way are you 100% secure in your power.

[Buzzrock 14941]

10 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

Yeah, when has an insurgency every held out for years against a foreign invader? 

That is this much larger and has no qualms about targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure? You tell me (really). 

[Shady Ray 1633]

 

 

 

 

[SL Xpress 7518]

Just now, Buzzrock said:

That is this much larger and has no qualms about targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure? You tell me (really). 

When you say much larger, what does that mean? They’re better armed, but population wise Russia is 144 million to Ukraine’s 44 million. I don’t think of that as much larger, but maybe we’re working within different contexts. 

[formermav43 4606]

3 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

That is this much larger and has no qualms about targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure? You tell me (really). 

Even with those added stipulations , the Soviet-Afghan War immediately comes to mind.

[SL Xpress 7518]

1 minute ago, Shady Ray said:

 

 

 

 

This is my shocked face. 
 

It’s never ever ever ever ever going to happen. They will avoid direct military confrontation between NATO and Russia until/unless Russia attacks a signatory nation. 

[TwiceHorn 31535]

6 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

There is hope for an internal solution to Putin. 

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/zelensky-survives-three-assassination-attempts-in-days-xnstdfdfc

 

If your own spy agency has people actively helping the enemy then in no way are you 100% secure in your power.

You just have to think.  And if FSB has dissenters, other orgs do too.  Hopefully including the nuclear "chain of command."

[F250 28818]

7 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

Go Unions! 

 

[Buzzrock 14941]

4 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

How much do you know about the Maidan Revolution? I’m not trying to say it’s the equivalent to an insurgency, but it also wasn’t a simple protest. The governing president had spent significant sums building out the beginnings of a repressive police force, and they were unleashed on the protesters, including snipers, armored personnel carriers - the works. It wasn’t Allepo, but it wasn’t exactly the Washington Monument, either. 

There’s no telling how they’ll respond. I’m just saying there are plenty of indications they’re ready to fight to the death. Which is good. Because that’s what will happen in the thousands. Possibly the hundreds of thousands. 

And when Russia wins anyway and takes over Ukraine, what will have been the point of all those deaths?

I get that it feels “un-American” (whatever that means any more) to take a live-to-fight-another-day approach, and we Americans have been taught all our lives to be macho and ain’t skeered and rah rah and “USA! USA!” etc. But my belief is that Ukraine cannot win this. They are tremendously outmatched and their opponent is ruthless. This isn’t Vietnam or Iraq or Afghanistan where the more powerful military actively avoids civilian casualties as much as possible. 
 

If you (or anyone) believes that Ukraine can win then I hope you’re right. I really do. Miracles do happen. But I believe that it’s a foregone conclusion that Putin will ratchet up the intensity until they crush any resistance. If I’m right then the right thing to do, the humanitarian thing to do, is to end the fighting asap, ESPECIALLY if we are 100% unwilling to send our sons and daughters to fight. If the West tells Zelensky the same thing and he says they are going to fight anyway then that’s his decision. But right now he has all of the West telling him “Yeah man, go fight Russia! Here’s some weapons! Oh no, we’re not gonna fight with you, that guy is crazy and has nukes, but good luck. You’re doing the right thing.”

[Buzzrock 14941]

13 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Your logic appears to be to just give the murderous thug whatever he wants. I don't see why you think that is better. 

For now. And less Ukrainians will die. Yes I see that as better. 

[Nivek 16986]

 
oh, all it took for this to happen was RUS invading UKR? great job!

Meh, changing government rules to remove abuse is likely challenging when there is little political will to do so, especially if there are people who have a financial interest in retaining the status-quo.

[TexasEd 8077]

7 hours ago, Hermanator said:

I wish I knew enough to have a specific answer to that. What I do know is in a situation like this it's best to surround the enemy on 3 sides making it clear they cannot win yet leaving that 4th side open for them to retreat. Exactly what to leave open for Putin I don't have the knowledge to say, but completely cornering him to where he feels a fight to the death is the only way can make this get very close to nuclear war. 

We don't know if Putin is hell bent on starting that nuclear war or not, but either way trying to stretch him out over time and talk him off the ledge is more likely to get a positive result than rushing into Ukraine to end his army or conpletely crippling his economy. The time for a show of force and deterrence by loading troops in the Ukraine was before he invaded. Now that he's pot committed it's a tight rope walk to keep this from getting too messy. 

 

6 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

What to leave open for him to retreat?  There's something, and I can't quite put my finger on it....but I feel like there's something there.

 

I get what you are saying, but giving him a chunk of Ukraine for him to leave the rest of Ukraine alone is just setting things up for something worse down the line.

And he's not finished - Moldova is going to be coming off the bench soon, whether they want to or not.

He can't maintain the tempo that he is now, and Ukraine is fighting back on the offensive in some areas now.   Get more and more stingers and Javelins and NLAWs into Ukraine and his helicopters won't be able to move, and his tanks will start going down even faster.

He will level the country before he leaves.  He's a spurned love hell-bent on destroying the object of his affection.

There is no viable out. This is an all in scenario for Putin. He either wins or dies. 
 

A western aligned and independent Ukraine is too much of an economic and geographic threat to Russia. The newly discovered oil and gas reserves are large enough to replace Russia for most of Europe they just need to get the productive. Crimea is the key to the Black Sea reserves and the rest of the country cuts off the pipelines from Russia. 

[Buzzrock 14941]

11 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

When you say much larger, what does that mean? They’re better armed, but population wise Russia is 144 million to Ukraine’s 44 million. I don’t think of that as much larger, but maybe we’re working within different contexts. 

Militarily larger. Not population. And nukes tip the scale further.

[Dahobbs 17681]

4 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

For now. And less Ukrainians will die. Yes I see that as better. 

Who are you to tell them what to do? Would you expect us to just give up? If Putin decides Germany is next, should we tell them to surrender too?

[GabrielsHorn 2186]

 

[Buzzrock 14941]

15 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

Even with those added stipulations , the Soviet-Afghan War immediately comes to mind.

That’s a totally fair example to bring up. The difference in my mind is that the Soviet Union was a one-party Marxist regime, and Russia is now ruled by an all-powerful dictator. At no point did the USSR invoke all of its military might to conquer Afghanistan. It was more comparable to the US in Vietnam or Iraq. 
 

But it’s a good answer. Could Ukraine become Russia’s Afghanistan quagmire? I don’t know. 

[GabrielsHorn 2186]

Gaslighting bastard

 

[Buzzrock 14941]

6 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Who are you to tell them what to do? Would you expect us to just give up? If Putin decides Germany is next, should we tell them to surrender too?

I’m not telling anyone what to do. I’m stating my opinion, like everyone else.
 

Stay on topic. We are talking about Ukraine, not made up threats of invasion to the US or Germany. 

[SL Xpress 7518]

Just now, Buzzrock said:

And when Russia wins anyway and takes over Ukraine, what will have been the point of all those deaths?

I get that it feels “un-American” (whatever that means any more) to take a live-to-fight-another-day approach, and we Americans have been taught all our lives to be macho and ain’t skeered and rah rah and “USA! USA!” etc. But my belief is that Ukraine cannot win this. They are tremendously outmatched and their opponent is ruthless. This isn’t Vietnam or Iraq or Afghanistan where the more powerful military actively avoids civilian casualties as much as possible. 
 

If you (or anyone) believes that Ukraine can win then I hope you’re right. I really do. Miracles do happen. But I believe that it’s a foregone conclusion that Putin will ratchet up the intensity until they crush any resistance. If I’m right then the right thing to do, the humanitarian thing to do, is to end the fighting asap, ESPECIALLY if we are 100% unwilling to send our sons and daughters to fight. If the West tells Zelensky the same thing and he says they are going to fight anyway then that’s his decision. But right now he has all of the West telling him “Yeah man, go fight Russia! Here’s some weapons! Oh no, we’re not gonna fight with you, that guy is crazy and has nukes, but good luck. You’re doing the right thing.”

The US offered to evacuate Zelensky and he told them no. A small Ukrainian border patrol contingent told a Russian warship to fuck off. A little old lady walked up to a Russian soldier, handed him some sunflower seeds, then told him to keep them so when he dies on Ukrainian soil sunflowers will grow from his lifeless corpse. 

We’ve seen footage of countless groups of I don’t give a fuck Ukrainians walking up to tanks and APCs to tell the Russians to go back home. 

We’ve seen multiple sports and entertainment stars from the country drop everything to return to Ukraine to fight. 

Putin’s forces aren’t numerous enough. Right now he has 3 soldiers on the ground for every 1000 Ukrainians inside the country and just outside still ready to be deployed. That’s woefully low. The javelins and stingers being supplied are outstanding anti-tank/anti air single soldier platforms. Urban warfare will be a nightmare. Russian soldiers are not motivated. They’re not being supplied well. Leadership and training is poor. Yes, they have overwhelming force at their disposal, but their ability to execute is severely lacking on multiple fronts. 

As far as the point, we’re all going to die. I can’t tell you what’s worth it to you. I can tell you if I was Ukrainian I’d be over there right now risking my life as well. I’m not and I won’t, but I certainly understand the mentality. 

[Guest Lobo]

I'm starting to think that Putin may not be the stable genius I was promised.

[NoName 16405]

21 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

Even with those added stipulations , the Soviet-Afghan War immediately comes to mind.

just to be clear, that ended 30+ years ago and the USSR was literally a different country than Russia is today.

[TXSG8R 3362]

20 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

 

 

 

 

People need to understand that a no-fly zone would have no real impact on Russia’s capability.  They can level Kiev with artillery and MLRS from Belarus. They can level most of the southern areas with naval guns.  For the stuff outside of the cheap guns range they have ballistic and cruise missiles. A no-fly zone doesn’t solve anything. 

[bolverk 29717]

18 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

For now. And less Ukrainians will die. Yes I see that as better. 

Besides, it's not your, mine, or even Biden's call. Continuing to fight is the decision of the Ukrainians and theirs alone.

[bolverk 29717]

3 minutes ago, TXSG8R said:

People need to understand that a no-fly zone would have no real impact on Russia’s capability.  They can level Kiev with artillery and MLRS from Belarus. They can level most of the southern areas with naval guns.  For the stuff outside of the cheap guns range they have ballistic and cruise missiles. A no-fly zone doesn’t solve anything. 

Nice avatar

[Dahobbs 17681]

11 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

I’m not telling anyone what to do. I’m stating my opinion, like everyone else.
 

Stay on topic. We are talking about Ukraine, not made up threats of invasion to the US or Germany. 

So, what are you asking that we do? Are you saying our government should tell the Ukranians to stop fighting for their country, that it isn't worth it? And, if you think we should do that, what country do you think would be worth fighting for and why? 

Why don't you stop posting here and go and tell the Ukranians to just give up. Tell us how they respond. 

Edited March 4, 2022 by Dahobbs

[MNLonghornFUKM 8819]

And when Russia wins anyway and takes over Ukraine, what will have been the point of all those deaths?
I get that it feels “un-American” (whatever that means any more) to take a live-to-fight-another-day approach, and we Americans have been taught all our lives to be macho and ain’t skeered and rah rah and “USA! USA!” etc. But my belief is that Ukraine cannot win this. They are tremendously outmatched and their opponent is ruthless. This isn’t Vietnam or Iraq or Afghanistan where the more powerful military actively avoids civilian casualties as much as possible. 
 
If you (or anyone) believes that Ukraine can win then I hope you’re right. I really do. Miracles do happen. But I believe that it’s a foregone conclusion that Putin will ratchet up the intensity until they crush any resistance. If I’m right then the right thing to do, the humanitarian thing to do, is to end the fighting asap, ESPECIALLY if we are 100% unwilling to send our sons and daughters to fight. If the West tells Zelensky the same thing and he says they are going to fight anyway then that’s his decision. But right now he has all of the West telling him “Yeah man, go fight Russia! Here’s some weapons! Oh no, we’re not gonna fight with you, that guy is crazy and has nukes, but good luck. You’re doing the right thing.”

Zelenskys nuclear videos last night were just that…a way to get the west involved in this mess. He spread panic. It’s why he wants to constantly close off Ukrainian air space, so we show up to the fight.


I agree with SL…this will not be occupied by Russians, ever. Not now. It’ll be a civil war. Whatever’s worth it to Ukrainians to keep fighting for, again like you said-not me to decide. But I know we’ll be sending aid, relief in the billions, probably trillions, because of this mess. By then Kyiv will probably be straight from an alien invasion movie.

And everybody important to you is dead or displaced that you’ll never see again.

[SL Xpress 7518]

Just now, TXSG8R said:

People need to understand that a no-fly zone would have no real impact on Russia’s capability.  They can level Kiev with artillery and MLRS from Belarus. They can level most of the southern areas with naval guns.  For the stuff outside of the cheap guns range they have ballistic and cruise missiles. A no-fly zone doesn’t solve anything. 

Are they going to be leveling the southern areas with naval guns? Because they don’t have any battleships. If they’re not using missiles or land based artillery, I don’t think they’ll be leveling much with just their ships. Especially anything not right on the coast. 

And I don’t agree on the impact of a no fly zone. It would be huge for a number of reasons. But it’s moot. It won’t happen. (I wonder if me saying this could be a drinking game - a dangerous drinking game).

[MNLonghornFUKM 8819]

So, what are you asking that we do? Are you saying our government should tell the Ukranians to stop fighting for their country, that it isn't worth it? And, if you think we should do that, what country do you think would be worth fighting for and why? 

This whole thing is shitty. What were the guidelines putin wanted out of Ukraine before he started launching an invasion? Taking That deal seems a hell of a lot cheaper than the cost of human lives and infrastructure that’s already been lost.

[Dahobbs 17681]

Just now, MNLonghornFUKM said:

This whole thing is shitty. What were the guidelines putin wanted out of Ukraine before he started launching an invasion? Taking That deal seems a hell of a lot cheaper than the cost of human lives and infrastructure that’s already been lost.

Oh, complete surrender to Putin's demands. Great. No more NATO. Also, whenever Putin demands something else, I guess we got to give in because it'll be cheaper. Whatever you say comrade.