Jump to content

Русский корабль - иди нахуй

Eastwood

By Eastwood
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 86.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • atomheartbevo

    8624

  • MillerEP

    7299

  • Schulz2.0

    3646

  • InkaUtexas

    3007

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

AUS-97HORN
AUS-97HORN

For the love of Christ woman,  stop posting the same fucking thing every 20 mins just to make your neurotic self feel better.     Bring something useful to the thread other than your inane babbli

closetohumping
closetohumping
InkaUtexas
InkaUtexas

I volunteered today. Log/Admin role to replace people for 30-60 days. The operation is in the west, or should the Orcs win will be pulled back behind the NATO wall. Either way the humanitarian effort

Posted Images

956 Worldwide

956 Worldwide 34,728

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Parliament said:

SO on brand for the United Nations.

This is frustrating but the entity that deserves your ire is only the Russian Federation. The UNSC presidency rotates every month, it’s Russians turn, we get it a couple months later. 
 

These are the rules, and because fundamental rules changes for the UNDC require consensus, you can’t change them unless Russia agrees. And the UN didn’t write the rules, the countries that created it did. And they (including us) wouldn’t have joined if consensus wasn’t part of the deal. And we play that card ourselves, although less frequently of late.

The UN has an effete and craven bureaucracy, and deserves lots of frustration but on this one— there’s not much to be done. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Parliament

Parliament 14,263

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

This is frustrating but the entity that deserves your ire is only the Russian Federation. The UNSC presidency rotates every month, it’s Russians turn, we get it a couple months later. 
 

These are the rules, and because fundamental rules changes for the UNDC require consensus, you can’t change them unless Russia agrees. And the UN didn’t write the rules, the countries that created it did. And they (including us) wouldn’t have joined if consensus wasn’t part of the deal. And we play that card ourselves, although less frequently of late.

The UN has an effete and craven bureaucracy, and deserves lots of frustration but on this one— there’s not much to be done. 

I know.  Still...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SL Xpress

SL Xpress 7,516

Posted
Posted

So this is a 47m video about the return of two teenage girls, Nastya age 18, and Masha, age 17, to Ukrainian territory after being deceived into evacuating from Kherson to Crimea by collaborators and Russian authorities. 

I'm not going to vouch for the quality of the reporting. To me it feels like a bunch of people who are a little out of their depth. What I can vouch for is that very quality is a part of what allowed them to do what they did - basically organize the girls' departure when no one else was willing to do it. So if you find the story a little slow going, stick with it if you find the material compelling, because the story itself is pretty amazing. 

One of the people interviewed claims there are hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian children held in Russian controlled territory, both in Donbas/Crimea, and other regions, as well as Russia itself. As Zelensky says in footage from a press conference, there is not much Ukraine can do to compel the return of those children. As we all know, a chief instigator of the arrest warrant for Putin issued by The Hague is about the abduction of children, but it continues to be an underreported ongoing issue, namely because the war itself takes precedence, for understandable reasons. 

In any case, this was released yesterday, so it's very new. I hope these kids' stories become a viral hit, and they get to meet with President Zelensky as they imagine. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
statsman

statsman 5,472

Posted
Posted

The WSJ had another story about the Bakhmut defenders needing shells. I wish we (the US) would increase shell production to where Ukraine could fling them around like a U.S. unit. 
This spring counter-offensive will probably tell the story for this war. It would be awful if it were to fail because of administration concerns about managing domestic artillery production. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trey3216

Trey3216 15,349

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, statsman said:

The WSJ had another story about the Bakhmut defenders needing shells. I wish we (the US) would increase shell production to where Ukraine could fling them around like a U.S. unit. 
This spring counter-offensive will probably tell the story for this war. It would be awful if it were to fail because of administration concerns about managing domestic artillery production. 

They fling shells around at several orders of magnitude higher than any US unit would as it is.  We use airplanes for our precision strikes.  

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

Nivek 16,946

Posted
Posted
The WSJ had another story about the Bakhmut defenders needing shells. I wish we (the US) would increase shell production to where Ukraine could fling them around like a U.S. unit. 
This spring counter-offensive will probably tell the story for this war. It would be awful if it were to fail because of administration concerns about managing domestic artillery production. 

It’s not a switch that can just be turned on. I am guessing our setup is designed to meet US needs for the way we fight not for WW1 tactics of blow the shit out of the earth across those lines and keep doing it.

I kind of wish we could send more assets. I think allowing Ukraine to invade Russia back is the only way this ends favorably for Ukraine. Pussyfooting around favors Russia’s leadership. And the cleanup of these WW1 tactics is going to be a mess. Might as well make Russia clean up their land, instead of on Ukraine soil.
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BamaATL

BamaATL 16,593

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Handcruser said:

I wish we would send those other shells that contain hundreds of mini-explosives…..whatever they are called. I know they are hell to cleanup but would be insanely beneficial during the offensive. Maybe we have sent them and they’re going to be a surprise.

Cluster munitions?  They are there, we covertly funded them being their via Pakistan.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
statsman

statsman 5,472

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

They fling shells around at several orders of magnitude higher than any US unit would as it is.  We use airplanes for our precision strikes.  

Sure. They don’t have the air ability to fight like we do. Let’s get them the shells. It’ll be worth it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chad Fuck

Chad Fuck 17,687

Posted
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, Nivek said:


It’s not a switch that can just be turned on. I am guessing our setup is designed to meet US needs for the way we fight not for WW1 tactics of blow the shit out of the earth across those lines and keep doing it.

I kind of wish we could send more assets. I think allowing Ukraine to invade Russia back is the only way this ends favorably for Ukraine. Pussyfooting around favors Russia’s leadership. And the cleanup of these WW1 tactics is going to be a mess. Might as well make Russia clean up their land, instead of on Ukraine soil.

Still not cleaned up in France, over 100 years later.

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

1280px-Red_Zone_Map-fr.svg.png

Quote

According to the Sécurité Civileagency in charge, at the current rate, 300[2] to 700 more years will be needed to clean the area completely. Some experiments conducted in 2005–06 discovered up to 300 shells per hectare (120 per acre) in the top 15 cm (6 inches) of soil in the worst areas

 

Edited by Chad Fuck
  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SydneyCarton

SydneyCarton 48,112

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Nice that Finland got it in, shitty that Sweden is getting fucked over, especially when part of it is because of pro-Russian instigators stirring shit up.

But Russia won't fuck with Sweden at this point - they don't even share a border with them.

This was my thought. It sucks for Sweden, but they're they don't share the border with Russia, Finland does. Seems like while everyone drags their feet, Finland just signs a unilateral defense agreement with Finland, which they probably already have done anyway. Russia wants to fuck up Sweden for some reason, they have to go through Finland anyway. Sweden will get in sooner rather than later I'd wager. 

10 hours ago, Nivek said:

We should send some Texans to help Winterize the Russian grid. 

What the fuck to Texans know about winterizing an electrical grid?

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

KYHorn 17,094

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

This was my thought. It sucks for Sweden, but they're they don't share the border with Russia, Finland does. Seems like while everyone drags their feet, Finland just signs a unilateral defense agreement with Finland, which they probably already have done anyway. Russia wants to fuck up Sweden for some reason, they have to go through Finland anyway. Sweden will get in sooner rather than later I'd wager. 

What the fuck to Texans know about winterizing an electrical grid?

Mayim Bialik Mirror GIF by CallMeKatFOX

Link to comment
Share on other sites
locodos

locodos 5,387

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, statsman said:

The WSJ had another story about the Bakhmut defenders needing shells. I wish we (the US) would increase shell production to where Ukraine could fling them around like a U.S. unit. 
This spring counter-offensive will probably tell the story for this war. It would be awful if it were to fail because of administration concerns about managing domestic artillery production. 

The thing is that we sent them something like 2x the number of artillery shells that the cannons we sent them can fire.  The barrels are only rated for so many rounds...  Is there a fudge factor?  Sure...  but if they need more "shells" they actually need a whole new round of artillery from soup to nuts.

 

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

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 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...