Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[CHIEF 5,095]

2 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

If he truly has a religious bone in his body, as he portrays. Does anyone think he worries about his soul, if he bombs the human race into extinction? He could replace Hitler as the one getting a pineapple up the ass., maybe even 2-3 per day.

CHIEF

[atomheartbevo 89,787]

1 hour ago, Keef said:

Are you willing to risk your entire family on that premise?  I'm not.  He's paid a grave price for his invasion of Ukraine.  Russia is a pariah, both economically and politically.  It's not near the price he deserved to pay, but it is a price, and once the seal is off a nuclear warhead, I think we're all toast.  If you don't die in the initial blast, you'll starve.  That's the choice we're looking at.

What you are suggesting means that NATO and Russia will end up directly fighting, which means risking your family and means you are literally picking the option that will lead to the thing you are scared of.

Putin and his mouthpieces on state TV have stated that they won’t stop with Ukraine, and that the Baltics (NATO countries if you don’t know), Georgia, Moldova, etc. are next.   They don’t hide this shit, they fucking brag about it on the evening shows on state TV. They fucking brag about taking the Baltics. 

When Vladimir Putin and his official Kremlin mouthpieces are publicly telling you that they won’t stop with Ukraine, you fucking listen to them.  

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3,868]

Are you willing to risk your entire family on that premise?  I'm not.  He's paid a grave price for his invasion of Ukraine.  Russia is a pariah, both economically and politically.  It's not near the price he deserved to pay, but it is a price, and once the seal is off a nuclear warhead, I think we're all toast.  If you don't die in the initial blast, you'll starve.  That's the choice we're looking at.

You’d only be postponing the showdown and strengthening RU’s use of Nuke terrorism while giving RU time to regenerate. RU/Putin wants to restore the USSR and is fine with genocide.

[atomheartbevo 89,787]

6 minutes ago, The Dog said:

 

With what?  They’ve already sent vehicles, ammo and supplies to Russian forces.  Belarus had a military budget of $660 million a year, and we are giving that to Ukraine every few weeks.  They have 60,000 active duty troops, with another 340,000 “reserves”, which are probably as poorly equipped and organized as Russia’s.  
 

I would be shocked - Lukashenko needs those troops to remain in power.   Putin is scared though, and maybe willing to sacrifice Lukashenko.

[SaucyJack 3,502]

1 hour ago, Keef said:

I'm all for staring down Putin, standing up for Ukraine, etc.  But the ultimate goal of what we do should be this: do not end up a nuclear conflict.  If that means giving Russia the annexed lands, so be it.  I have no interest in America (and the world) being vaporized over a country half a world a way.  Putin needs an off ramp so he can save face, and I'm all for giving it to him.  I doubt that he's learned his lesson or anything, but the odds that he actually mount another land grab in his lifetime seems remote.  He doesn't have the political capital internally to do it.

What Queef doing?

 

[Pato del Muerto 52,583]

Can someone explain to me how pipelines work if it’s been shut off for weeks but can still pour product when ruptured. 

is it all just residual in between valves, in the pipe on the sea floor that now has no back pressure to get pushed out?

 

[atomheartbevo 89,787]

 

 

 

[Viper 12,112]

Starting? 

[atomheartbevo 89,787]

[Superhero 8,834]

Would a preemptive strike by Polish forces into Belarus be frowned upon by the international community?

I think there would be some hand wringing and maybe a sternly worded letter. But I think most of NATO would be okay with it if Belarus is massing troops at the border. 

[CHIEF 5,095]

11 minutes ago, SaucyJack said:

What Queef doing?

 

Thank you SJ. I tried to post the same thing and couldn't get it hooked up.

CHIEF

[atomheartbevo 89,787]

 

[Gatorubet 30,298]

I'm all for staring down Putin, standing up for Ukraine, etc.  But the ultimate goal of what we do should be this: do not end up a nuclear conflict.  If that means giving Russia the annexed lands, so be it.  I have no interest in America (and the world) being vaporized over a country half a world a way.  Putin needs an off ramp so he can save face, and I'm all for giving it to him.  I doubt that he's learned his lesson or anything, but the odds that he actually mount another land grab in his lifetime seems remote.  He doesn't have the political capital internally to do it.

I’m reading this and getting an image of some 50 year old guy continuing to give up his lunch money to the grade school bully 40 years later.  Why? Because the ultimate goal is to not end up in a fistfight with a bully. Let’s just continue to give him my wallet every day and maybe sometime in the future he’ll leave me alone.

[Fico 1,791]

2 hours ago, Keef said:

I'm all for staring down Putin, standing up for Ukraine, etc.  But the ultimate goal of what we do should be this: do not end up a nuclear conflict.  If that means giving Russia the annexed lands, so be it.  I have no interest in America (and the world) being vaporized over a country half a world a way.  Putin needs an off ramp so he can save face, and I'm all for giving it to him.  I doubt that he's learned his lesson or anything, but the odds that he actually mount another land grab in his lifetime seems remote.  He doesn't have the political capital internally to do it.

The word you are looking for is surrender.

 

The correct answer, nuts. Now go fuck off. 

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3,868]

Can someone explain to me how pipelines work if it’s been shut off for weeks but can still pour product when ruptured. 
is it all just residual in between valves, in the pipe on the sea floor that now has no back pressure to get pushed out?
 

Pressurized to keep depth pressure from crushing it.

[GabrielsHorn 2,186]

10 minutes ago, Superhero said:

Would a preemptive strike by Polish forces into Belarus be frowned upon by the international community?

I think there would be some hand wringing and maybe a sternly worded letter. But I think most of NATO would be okay with it if Belarus is massing troops at the border. 

That would essentially lead to NATO vs Russia which no one wants. For all intents and purposes, Belarus is Russia. 

[Keef 779]

6 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

2 hours ago, Keef said:

I'm all for staring down Putin, standing up for Ukraine, etc.  But the ultimate goal of what we do should be this: do not end up a nuclear conflict.  If that means giving Russia the annexed lands, so be it.  I have no interest in America (and the world) being vaporized over a country half a world a way.  Putin needs an off ramp so he can save face, and I'm all for giving it to him.  I doubt that he's learned his lesson or anything, but the odds that he actually mount another land grab in his lifetime seems remote.  He doesn't have the political capital internally to do it.

I’m reading this and getting an image of some 50 year old guy continuing to give up his lunch money to the grade school bully 40 years later.  Why? Because the ultimate goal is to not end up in a fistfight with a bully. Let’s just continue to give him my wallet every day and maybe sometime in the future he’ll leave me alone.

He's not taking our lunch money.  Or even a close friend's lunch money.  He's taking the lunch money of a country that was part of Russia in my lifetime.  I'm all for taking every non-military measure in the book against Russia.  Decouple our economies.  Kick them of SWIFT.  Etc.  But the bottom line is nuclear war is the worst outcome from the whole world, and I do not support us being the world's police.  

[CHIEF 5,095]

1 minute ago, Fico said:

The word you are looking for is surrender.

 

The correct answer, nuts. Now go fuck off. 

I think this what you are looking for...

CHIEF

[SimonBolivar 10,959]

3 minutes ago, Keef said:

He's not taking our lunch money.  Or even a close friend's lunch money.  He's taking the lunch money of a country that was part of Russia in my lifetime.  I'm all for taking every non-military measure in the book against Russia.  Decouple our economies.  Kick them of SWIFT.  Etc.  But the bottom line is nuclear war is the worst outcome from the whole world, and I do not support us being the world's police.  

Ukraine is a real place with a real people that obviously don't want to be Russian. We wouldn't be here watching Russia lose a war if they werent a real people. Stop listening to Putin on what is and isn't Russia.

Edited September 30, 2022 by SimonBolivar

[Keef 779]

Look I fully appreciate that this is a thread full of people perfectly willing to match Putin every turn in the hope of crippling Russia.  I understand the logic and the rationale.  I just don't agree with it, and would prefer we not mess with a cornered and crazed animal over cause that, while I sympathize with deeply, I also have no wish for us to be involved with.  Agree to disagree.

[Gatorubet 30,298]

He's not taking our lunch money.  Or even a close friend's lunch money.  He's taking the lunch money of a country that was part of Russia in my lifetime.  I'm all for taking every non-military measure in the book against Russia.  Decouple our economies.  Kick them of SWIFT.  Etc.  But the bottom line is nuclear war is the worst outcome from the whole world, and I do not support us being the world's police.  

Did you somehow miss the repeated Putin threats to use nuclear war in case any of us have a problem with Russia also taking over our NATO allies in that area of the world?
Under your logic, since nobody wants nuclear war (the worst outcome for the whole world) we’ll just say “Fuck the game of Risk - let’s give the whole fucking board to Russia” whenever they want to absorb more land from other nations. 
So I guess I respectfully disagree
 
 

[atomheartbevo 89,787]

6 minutes ago, Keef said:

He's not taking our lunch money.  Or even a close friend's lunch money.  He's taking the lunch money of a country that was part of Russia in my lifetime.  I'm all for taking every non-military measure in the book against Russia.  Decouple our economies.  Kick them of SWIFT.  Etc.  But the bottom line is nuclear war is the worst outcome from the whole world, and I do not support us being the world's police.  

He won’t stop with Ukraine.  Putin and his mouthpieces have said this.

[Deej 76,903]

10 minutes ago, Keef said:

He's not taking our lunch money.  Or even a close friend's lunch money.  He's taking the lunch money of a country that was part of Russia in my lifetime.  I'm all for taking every non-military measure in the book against Russia.  Decouple our economies.  Kick them of SWIFT.  Etc.  But the bottom line is nuclear war is the worst outcome from the whole world, and I do not support us being the world's police.  

How much does Russia pay you each month to post here?

Let me rephrase that.

How does Putin's ass taste?

Edited September 30, 2022 by Deej

[Pato del Muerto 52,583]

9 minutes ago, Keef said:

He's not taking our lunch money.  Or even a close friend's lunch money.  He's taking the lunch money of a country that was part of Russia in my lifetime.  I'm all for taking every non-military measure in the book against Russia.  Decouple our economies.  Kick them of SWIFT.  Etc.  But the bottom line is nuclear war is the worst outcome from the whole world, and I do not support us being the world's police.  

And when he knows that the nuclear threat is what gets us to stand down, suddenly all of those things you mention will be met with nuclear threats. 

[Gatorubet 30,298]

1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

And when he thought that the nuclear threat is what would get us to stand down, suddenly all of those things you mention were met with Putin’s nuclear threats. 

fify

[SimonBolivar 10,959]

3 minutes ago, Deej said:

How much does Russia pay you each month to post here?

Calm down Deej, Neville Chamberlain isn't Russian

 

 

 

but he does have bowel cancer. 

[Deej 76,903]

Just now, SimonBolivar said:

Calm down Deej, Neville Chamberlain isn't Russian

 

 

 

but he does have bowel cancer. 

Kurt Bowels cancer?

[Gatorubet 30,298]

4 minutes ago, Deej said:

How much does Russia pay you each month to post here?

Let me rephrase that.

How does Putin's ass taste?

Look, 

Isolationism has been a legitimate tenet of American political thought for sometime, especially after the cluster fuck of World War I. 

I have no issues with someone who is concerned about his family and loved ones who does not want to risk a war halfway across the world if his loved ones may die. Unfortunately, we now live in a world where shoving your head in the sand and not caring what happens in the rest of the world will not make you safe. Which is unfortunate.

[CHIEF 5,095]

Accept it, if it happens Keef. Maybe you should visit the "Christ followers" thread. We think we are in control of our own destiny, that is not a belief I harbor, in the Macro. Figure out what you believe, and go from there. Initially, I would have sacrificed all of the Ukrainian people for my family's safety, but enough is enough. I am willing to take the risk. If shit happens, I hope to see them on the other side. You have to take a stand for something.

CHIEF

[Keef 779]

3 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

Calm down Deej, Neville Chamberlain isn't Russian

 

 

 

but he does have bowel cancer. 

If Hitler had nukes, we'd all be dead.  Neville Chamberlain was wrong at the time, clearly.  But we're playing with a different set of cards now.  Absent nukes, we absolutely would have been in a conventional war with Russia, probably several times over.  But nukes exist, and we haven't, and I would prefer that we continue to not be in a nuclear war with them.  

[Deej 76,903]

4 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Look, 

Isolationism has been a legitimate tenet of American political thought for sometime, especially after the cluster fuck of World War I. 

I have no issues with someone who is concerned about his family and loved ones who does not want to risk a war halfway across the world if his loved ones may die. Unfortunately, we now live in a world where shoving your head in the sand and not caring what happens in the rest of the world will not make you safe. Which is unfortunate.

Looking away from the shit Putin is trying to pull is not going to keep you safe. Trying to convince others to do so at this point reeks of Russian disinformation.

[SmokeyTheBear 5,562]

5 minutes ago, Keef said:

If Hitler had nukes, we'd all be dead.  Neville Chamberlain was wrong at the time, clearly.  But we're playing with a different set of cards now.  Absent nukes, we absolutely would have been in a conventional war with Russia, probably several times over.  But nukes exist, and we haven't, and I would prefer that we continue to not be in a nuclear war with them.  

Until you convince Putin otherwise, that's the only card he can play and will if he wants. If not today, then it'll be tomorrow. 

[atomheartbevo 89,787]

 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11,669]

4 minutes ago, Keef said:

If Hitler had nukes, we'd all be dead.  Neville Chamberlain was wrong at the time, clearly.  But we're playing with a different set of cards now.  Absent nukes, we absolutely would have been in a conventional war with Russia, probably several times over.  But nukes exist, and we haven't, and I would prefer that we continue to not be in a nuclear war with them.  

We have a legitimate opportunity to do something for the future in a way no other generation has.  We have a hyperpower military being used to finally say “the era of conquest is over” and have everyone on planet earth believe it because we stared down the country that is nuked to the hilt like it is nothing.  Or we can say that if you are one of the lucky few countries that have nukes, take what you want.  Those are two totally different futures we are building.  That’s worth risking a lot to me. 

[The Dog 44,138]

 

[CHIEF 5,095]

7 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

We have a legitimate opportunity to do something for the future in a way no other generation has.  We have a hyperpower military being used to finally say “the era of conquest is over” and have everyone on planet earth believe it because we stared down the country that is nuked to the hilt like it is nothing.  Or we can say that if you are one of the lucky few countries that have nukes, take what you want.  Those are two totally different futures we are building.  That’s worth risking a lot to me. 

You can bet China has taken notice. Does anyone think China is about to launch a strike against Taiwan?  The attack wouldn't make it past a couple of days . The US has shut up the World.

CHIEF

[Gravy Train 974]

48 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

 

Julia should spend more effort chastising the absolute shitheels over at Meta, not those having fun with alt-translated videos.

 

Then again, if you get your "news" from Facebook, I'm not sure what to tell you...

[tx 3 putt 77,375]

3 hours ago, Keef said:

I'm all for staring down Putin, standing up for Ukraine, etc.  But the ultimate goal of what we do should be this: do not end up a nuclear conflict.  If that means giving Russia the annexed lands, so be it.  I have no interest in America (and the world) being vaporized over a country half a world a way.  Putin needs an off ramp so he can save face, and I'm all for giving it to him.  I doubt that he's learned his lesson or anything, but the odds that he actually mount another land grab in his lifetime seems remote.  He doesn't have the political capital internally to do it.

 

they're not launching nukes at the US

imo, this ends up being a nuke dirty bomb in Ukraine 

[MillerEP 30,495]

 

[MillerEP 30,495]

 

[Rimbo 26,059]

3 hours ago, Keef said:

I'm all for staring down Putin, standing up for Ukraine, etc.  But the ultimate goal of what we do should be this: do not end up a nuclear conflict.  If that means giving Russia the annexed lands, so be it.  I have no interest in America (and the world) being vaporized over a country half a world a way.  Putin needs an off ramp so he can save face, and I'm all for giving it to him.  I doubt that he's learned his lesson or anything, but the odds that he actually mount another land grab in his lifetime seems remote.  He doesn't have the political capital internally to do it.

"Peace in our time," eh Keef?

You don't seem to understand something. If we let him use the threat of nukes to gain territory, he'll do it again. He's said as much. He's made it clear that Ukraine is just a road he intends to use to invade more countries, and just keep going.

We've made it abundantly clear to him -- both through back channels and publicly -- that if he does use a nuke, his situation will be far worse. At least with the current conflict, we've made it clear we won't attack Russia, nor will we allow the weapons we're sending to Ukraine to be used in Russia. If he uses a nuke? All bets are off, and it will be us annexing Moscow, instead of Moscow annexing the Luhansk, in the end.

[Keef 779]

20 minutes ago, Deej said:

Looking away from the shit Putin is trying to pull is not going to keep you safe. Trying to convince others to do so at this point reeks of Russian disinformation.

I can arrive at the conclusion I don't want a global nuclear war all by myself, thanks.  I'm from west Texas, and I can vividly remember the rush up to the Afghanistan war and then the Iraq war (LOL) and how they were painted as moral inevitabilities.  A choice between good and evil.  I wasn't alive then, but I'm sure Vietnam was the same way.  America is my home and I love it, but we have our propaganda too. 

Putin is an evil evil person, but there are lots of bad people in the world (see, Syria) that Americans don't whip themselves into caring about, and I don't view this an imperative thing for us to be involved in.  He's not going to invade a NATO country, and even if he was so inclined, Russia does not have the capacity to wage war on another country in the near future.  Whatever gains they hold onto in Ukraine (if any) are going to keep them plenty occupied for years to come.  So if I was in charge, which I'm not, we'd be staying out in any militaristic sense.

I totally hear Underminer's point, and it's a good one.  I just view the risk of pushing your chips into the center of the table to neuter Russia as too high.  They've already done a lot of that job for us.  It'll take years for them to recover economically, politically (both domestically and internationally), and militarily from this huge gaffe.  

[MillerEP 30,495]

 

[tx 3 putt 77,375]

3 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

 

 

shoot them down before those troops have any chance of touching the ground 

[AUS-97HORN 11,822]

1 minute ago, Rimbo said:

If he uses a nuke? All bets are off, and it will be us  [POLAND] annexing Moscow, instead of Moscow annexing the Luhansk, in the end.

FIFY

esp if Belarus jumps I dont see any chance of holding Poland  back... they may very well got after Kaliningrad first, but they are fucking taking out Belarus in process and prob wont stop till they are on the East side of Moscow

[The Dog 44,138]

29 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

 

THIS is why Poopin is declaring the annexation and trying to rattle nuclear sabres tomorrow.

Shit gets real Saturday and I ain't talking about our shitty football team.

[MillerEP 30,495]

 

[Rimbo 26,059]

1 hour ago, ShaggyBevo RIP said:

To irradiate the Black Sea to non navigable would be suicidal by RU.

RU is already committing suicide. They've fed a generation to the slaughter, wasted their economy, and left themselves nearly defenseless along hostile borders.

[Gatorubet 30,298]

3 minutes ago, Keef said:

I can arrive at the conclusion I don't want a global nuclear war all by myself, thanks.  I'm from west Texas, and I can vividly remember the rush up to the Afghanistan war and then the Iraq war (LOL) and how they were painted as moral inevitabilities.  A choice between good and evil.  I wasn't alive then, but I'm sure Vietnam was the same way.  America is my home and I love it, but we have our propaganda too. 

 

….and none of that has one thing to do with the topic on the table. Apples and potatos. 

Your stated theory is that Putin is crazy enough to use nukes in Ukraine and start a world nuclear war - but he would not dare attack a NATO ally.

OK. 

[Gravy Train 974]

20 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

You can bet China has taken notice. Does anyone think China is about to launch a strike against Taiwan?  The attack wouldn't make it past a couple of days . The US has shut up the World.

CHIEF

It's not even about the "attack" but all the economic and strategic pain our allies would bring about, with an economic game of chicken to brew and wait for China to break first-- because they well.  Naval blockades and denial of access to food, energy, and rare earths imports would break them in a matter of weeks.  Yes, that will all hurt us too, but I hope our lazy and naive politicians have realized enough that the CCP's butt-fumbles (cargo, manufacturing, Covid-19) are severe enough to diversify and onshore.