Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[Deej 76,219]

11 hours ago, BamaATL said:

When I think of a summer vacation, you are damn right Pyongyang is on high on the list.  It's there, Gary Indiana, East St Louis, or bust!

 

[atomheartbevo 89,053]

 

[WhatTheBuck 28,618]

2 hours ago, Schulz2.0 said:

 

 

 

Those clips and other local footage made it into the report on CBS News. Their correspondent Debora Patta was on her way to Chernihiv when the attack occurred so they were able to get some interviews during the immediate aftermath. I don’t know if it was from a local source or a CBS camera but they had a shot of the motionless figure of a woman who was apparently struck while sitting on a park bench.

Fuck Putin and fuck Russia. What they’re doing is pure evil.

 

[Steel Shank 9,338]

How long do we let this continue?

 

 

 

 

[Nivek 16,691]

What do you mean let?

[956 Worldwide 34,019]

I have said before that Biden needs to start thinking more about legacy and less about the immediate wonkism. The fact is we have a a foreign policy professional class that has decided to support Ukraine but has not allowed themselves to connect the dots that they should also want Russia to lose, explicitly. We are getting ever more confused and muddled about this. 
 

This attack in Chernihiv is showing the obvious, that Russia is barbaric and flailing and cannot win but can inflict a lot of damage.  And they will keep doing so until they lose, decisively.  
 

And paradoxically, the more we trickle stuff out the longer we tie ourselves to an amorphous policy goal. There needs to be smart people at State and DOD explaining to the NSC what Ukraine needs to win the war (not an offensive) and why that will be good for America instead of Jake Sullivan driving more milquetoast responses. 

[Hefeweizen 5,229]

Honestly at this point I’m good with just opening up the Arsenal and seeing what they need.  Send it all over.  Fuck Russia.  Fuck China.  Evil can’t be allowed to triumph.

 

 It’s possible I’ve had a few too many..

Edited August 20, 2023 by Hefeweizen
Overserved

[Pato del Muerto 52,117]

Evil triumphs when good is dumb. 

[atomheartbevo 89,053]

2 hours ago, Steel Shank said:

How long do we let this continue?

2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I have said before that Biden needs to start thinking more about legacy and less about the immediate wonkism. The fact is we have a a foreign policy professional class that has decided to support Ukraine but has not allowed themselves to connect the dots that they should also want Russia to lose, explicitly. We are getting ever more confused and muddled about this. 

This attack in Chernihiv is showing the obvious, that Russia is barbaric and flailing and cannot win but can inflict a lot of damage.  And they will keep doing so until they lose, decisively.  
And paradoxically, the more we trickle stuff out the longer we tie ourselves to an amorphous policy goal. There needs to be smart people at State and DOD explaining to the NSC what Ukraine needs to win the war (not an offensive) and why that will be good for America instead of Jake Sullivan driving more milquetoast responses. 

1 hour ago, Hefeweizen said:

Honestly at this point I’m good with just opening up the Arsenal and seeing what they need.  Send it all over.  Fuck Russia.  Fuck China.  Evil can’t be allowed to triumph.

I think we ought to boost the aid every time Russia does something like this.  I mean, I wish we could really just boost it regardless of what's happening, but unfortunately there is a group opposed to us doing that, even though we are literally spending tax dollars storing shit that we will never use again - our national defense is not going to depend on armored vehicles we built in the 70s-90s and mothballed in 2020, or F-16s we built in the 80s and mothballed in the 2010s.

But I think when the Russians do this, we send a big package over, and make anybody opposed to it try and defend the Russians publicly.

[Nivek 16,691]

I have said before that Biden needs to start thinking more about legacy and less about the immediate wonkism. The fact is we have a a foreign policy professional class that has decided to support Ukraine but has not allowed themselves to connect the dots that they should also want Russia to lose, explicitly. We are getting ever more confused and muddled about this. 
 
This attack in Chernihiv is showing the obvious, that Russia is barbaric and flailing and cannot win but can inflict a lot of damage.  And they will keep doing so until they lose, decisively.  
 
And paradoxically, the more we trickle stuff out the longer we tie ourselves to an amorphous policy goal. There needs to be smart people at State and DOD explaining to the NSC what Ukraine needs to win the war (not an offensive) and why that will be good for America instead of Jake Sullivan driving more milquetoast responses. 

How is this attack any different from the previous bad acts they have committed?

[atomheartbevo 89,053]

1 minute ago, Nivek said:

How is this attack any different from the previous bad acts they have committed?

It's not really, however it caught a lot of attention because it was broad daylight and quite a few videos made it out that were clear as day, and you had a CBS news crew on the way there, and had they been an hour earlier,  might have been killed/wounded themselves.

I'd toss this random discussion in - I was talking to a relative earlier this afternoon, and he was doing the "oh, we shouldn't send too much, because we'll cross a line and end up in WWIII" and I asked him why Putin kept backing down every time we (and NATO) crossed his red line, whether it was sending tanks, or cruise missiles, or PATRIOT systems, or now F-16s, or admitting Sweden and Finland into NATO, and he just did the "well Putin is ex-KGB, we have to be careful!"

Which then allowed me to point out that Putin's KGB background is a huge part of the reason why he won't start a war with us - because he's ex-KGB, he's scared as hell of being assassinated, either by his own people, or by us. I pointed out that Putin has had people poisoned both within Russia and within Europe (German, England). I mentioned sitting far away from a lot of his subordinates, and the big-ass tables when he met with world leaders, and his response was "Putin is just projecting power and putting them far away at the end of the table because we would not assassinate him."

Which led to me pointing out that we would not assassinate him, but based on his lack of presence in Moscow, his big-ass armored train, his decoys, his security detail cosplaying as all kinds of common Russians for photo ops, his avoidance of the front lines, and so on, he's clearly worried somebody will kill him. We (the collective West) may not assassinate him (well, so far), but he thinks about ways he would assassinate others, and that includes everything from poisoning to things like covid (which was still a big fucking deal even in late 2021 or early 2022 for Russians) or even smuggled bombs, and that's where the physical space comes in with the big-ass tables or the meetings in big rooms.  And when you see him doing photo ops with African or Arab leaders, those people have been thoroughly screened, and in most cases, he knows they are afraid of him, and he's in control of the situation. But he is not going to meet in close quarters with a room full of Russian officers or Western leaders if he can avoid it. 

[Schulz2.0 28,652]

 

 

[Schulz2.0 28,652]

 

[Schulz2.0 28,652]

 

 

[KYHorn 16,728]

 Wow those are awesome

These Ukrainians at @Wooden_Army are making really nice wooden models of HIMARS systems that can launch missiles, models consist of 580 parts. Their Kickstarter campaign ends in 10 days and they will be donating to a charity.

Check them out, their Kickstarter page has TONS of info. Go ahead and claim yours! kickstarter.com/projects/woode…

[Neonmoon 38,126]

9 hours ago, Steel Shank said:

How long do we let this continue?

 

9 hours ago, Nivek said:

What do you mean let?

I’ve been on team join the war for a while. I know it’s not a popular opinion, or even the smart idea. But helping people keep their freedom is noble and righteous, unlike many recent American wars. 

[KYHorn 16,728]

 

[Parliament 14,022]

9 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I have said before that Biden needs to start thinking more about legacy and less about the immediate wonkism. The fact is we have a a foreign policy professional class that has decided to support Ukraine but has not allowed themselves to connect the dots that they should also want Russia to lose, explicitly. We are getting ever more confused and muddled about this. 

There's nobody in this administration with thr vision to see the endgame and then call out all the progressive steps it takes to get there.  In WW2, it was "destroy Germany."  To do that you gotta get your army to Berlin.  To do that you gotta move your army across Holland, Belgium but first France.  To get to France you gotta invade France.  

In this war it's been, "Let's try this weapons system," "OK, now we need this other weapons system."  They're following the path where ever it goes.

Making it worse, they're dragging their feet on each incremental weapons system.

 

8 hours ago, Hefeweizen said:

Honestly at this point I’m good with just opening up the Arsenal and seeing what they need.  Send it all over.

We wanna keep our good stuff back, "just in case we need it for ourselves."  True.  But sending that Tier 1 stuff is gonna get it used against the enemy we would face in that scenario.  And make China take pause.

Instead, we're writing China's script (and to a degree Russia's script) for winning a war with us: Drag it out and make it brutal.

[Chad Fuck 17,309]

True.  But is there more? Are they aiding Russia because they want Russia to prevail in Ukraine? Or are they aiding Russia because they desire Russia to be as depleted as humanly possible when China decides to take over some of the Russian natural resources in the east - or have Russia so crippled and down on its luck that China can buy oil and precious metals and timber at even more rock-bottom prices. Hence, they want the war to continue.
I guess it could be the ‘enemy of my enemy is my friend’, but I tend to think there is some long -term China plan involved.  And the plan wants as many Russians dead as possible and Russia as broke as possible. Could be wrong.

Right now, I’m pretty sure the friend of my enemy is my enemy.

Could there be more that could help us? Maybe. But you’re judged by the company you keep and so far it looks like Russia, NK, Iran and China are pretty shitty company.

As a corollary, god help the rest of you guys for me being here.

[KYHorn 16,728]

I'm actually just impressed they were able to accurately hit it at all

[WhatTheBuck 28,618]

9 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I have said before that Biden needs to start thinking more about legacy and less about the immediate wonkism. The fact is we have a a foreign policy professional class that has decided to support Ukraine but has not allowed themselves to connect the dots that they should also want Russia to lose, explicitly. We are getting ever more confused and muddled about this

Not want Russia to lose? I don’t think that’s accurate at all. First, I think uniting, strengthening, and expanding NATO has already cemented Biden’s legacy in history but that legacy is still being written. The job’s not finished yet. But remember, Ukraine was supposed to fall in three days. Also remember that when Biden visited Helsinki to welcome Finland into NATO, adding 830 miles of NATO that’s bordering on Russia, he declared that “Putin’s already lost the war.” (A stark contrast to the statements made on the previous presidential visit to that city five years earlier.) I’d say that’s pretty explicit.

 

[WhatTheBuck 28,618]

5 minutes ago, KYHorn said:

I'm actually just impressed they were able to accurately hit it at all

Just heard that on the news. That’s perfect. It’s a PR embarrassment at just the right time. 

[Chad Fuck 17,309]

I'm actually just impressed they were able to accurately hit it at all

That’s a shame.gif

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11,569]

We did it with a flying abacus.  They can’t do it a half century later after stealing all our tech.  

[MissingInAction 24,431]

21 hours ago, Nivek said:

considering our grid conditions, we probably shouldn't make fun of them

[Steel Shank 9,338]

10 hours ago, Nivek said:

What do you mean let?

Do you believe we are doing everything possible to prevent these types of attacks?

[WhatTheBuck 28,618]

21 minutes ago, Steel Shank said:

Do you believe we are doing everything possible to prevent these types of attacks?

It’s possible to nuke Moscow. Should “everything possible” be the bar?

[Steel Shank 9,338]

9 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

It’s possible to nuke Moscow. Should “everything possible” be the bar?

How about this: Is there more we can be doing to help prevent these attacks?

[RPM 26,098]

The problem as I see it is Russia has nukes and Putin is batshit cray power hungry enough to use them. The solution has to come from inside.

[ABSR 5,275]

1 hour ago, KYHorn said:

I'm actually just impressed they were able to accurately hit it at all

I wonder if they did this to “beat” India to a moon landing who launched their mission July 14th versus August 11th for the more direct Russian trajectory.

“Luna 25’s trajectory allowed it to surpass India’s Chandrayaan-3 lunar lander, which launched in mid-July, on the way to the lunar surface.”

 

[Brisketexan 103,656]

I wonder if they did this to “beat” India to a moon landing who launched their mission July 14th versus August 11th for the more direct Russian trajectory.
“Luna 25’s trajectory allowed it to surpass India’s Chandrayaan-3 lunar lander, which launched in mid-July, on the way to the lunar surface.”
 

So….Russian went all “LEEEEEEROY JENKINS!” to the moon. That checks out.

[956 Worldwide 34,019]

2 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Not want Russia to lose? I don’t think that’s accurate at all. First, I think uniting, strengthening, and expanding NATO has already cemented Biden’s legacy in history but that legacy is still being written. The job’s not finished yet. But remember, Ukraine was supposed to fall in three days. Also remember that when Biden visited Helsinki to welcome Finland into NATO, adding 830 miles of NATO that’s bordering on Russia, he declared that “Putin’s already lost the war.” (A stark contrast to the statements made on the previous presidential visit to that city five years earlier.) I’d say that’s pretty explicit.

 

Rhetoric needs to match action. Russia cannot win but it has not lost. Russia will have lost the war when the last Russian soldier leaves Ukrainian territory. Including Crimea.

What are we doing to make that end-state likely? 

[The Dog 43,490]

2 hours ago, KYHorn said:

I'm actually just impressed they were able to accurately hit it at all

[Nathan Jessep 147]

11 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I have said before that Biden needs to start thinking more about legacy and less about the immediate wonkism. The fact is we have a a foreign policy professional class that has decided to support Ukraine but has not allowed themselves to connect the dots that they should also want Russia to lose, explicitly. We are getting ever more confused and muddled about this. 
 

This attack in Chernihiv is showing the obvious, that Russia is barbaric and flailing and cannot win but can inflict a lot of damage.  And they will keep doing so until they lose, decisively.  
 

And paradoxically, the more we trickle stuff out the longer we tie ourselves to an amorphous policy goal. There needs to be smart people at State and DOD explaining to the NSC what Ukraine needs to win the war (not an offensive) and why that will be good for America instead of Jake Sullivan driving more milquetoast responses. 

So what would you propose to do, short of us getting directly involved?  I don’t think anything changes without providing more advanced weapons systems. Maybe we should do that. 
 

There’s also the issue of funding it all. We’ve appropriated $111B over 18 months. That’s a $74B run rate. To make it to next August 20th and really make a push I think that’s another $100B. Unfortunately it will be a political issue. 

[956 Worldwide 34,019]

Looks like Ukrainian drones got a Tu-22 of some variant at an airfield near Great Novgorod. These platforms are some of their most used missile trucks so a good response to the Chernihiv theater attack.

https://x.com/intelcrab/status/1693245296791224801?s=46&t=sLnTqdt8bKng_n8HFlnwSg 

[Pato del Muerto 52,117]

2 hours ago, KYHorn said:

I'm actually just impressed they were able to accurately hit it at all

Beautiful plumage, the Luna

[Pato del Muerto 52,117]

4 minutes ago, Nathan Jessep said:

There’s also the issue of funding it all. We’ve appropriated $111B over 18 months. That’s a $74B run rate. To make it to next August 20th and really make a push I think that’s another $100B. Unfortunately it will be a political issue. 

Do those numbers figure in the cost savings if not storing and maintaining all this older, unused equipment for the next c years before finally spending more to obsolete and junk it?  Or factor in the defense orders we’ve gotten in the last 18 months due to some of the newer systems’ battle theater performance?

[Gatorubet 29,789]

6 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Looks like Ukrainian drones got a Tu-22 of some variant at an airfield near Great Novgorod. These platforms are some of their most used missile trucks so a good response to the Chernihiv theater attack.

https://x.com/intelcrab/status/1693245296791224801?s=46&t=sLnTqdt8bKng_n8HFlnwSg 

About 120 miles from St. Petersburg.  I hope they squirm a bit. 

 

[Gatorubet 29,789]

3 hours ago, Parliament said:

There's nobody in this administration with thr vision to see the endgame and then call out all the progressive steps it takes to get there.  In WW2, it was "destroy Germany."  To do that you gotta get your army to Berlin.  To do that you gotta move your army across Holland, Belgium but first France.  To get to France you gotta invade France.  

In this war it's been, "Let's try this weapons system," "OK, now we need this other weapons system."  They're following the path where ever it goes.

Making it worse, they're dragging their feet on each incremental weapons system.

Just brainstorming here, but maybe the difference is, Germany declared war on the United States after their ally bombed our Pacific Fleet. Having war declared on you will probably lead to more “progressive steps” being taken than if you were watching two  countries on the other side of the world, neither of them including you, in a military conflict.

[Parliament 14,022]

28 minutes ago, Nathan Jessep said:

I don’t think anything changes without providing more advanced weapons systems. Maybe we should do that. 
 

We should do that.

12 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Just brainstorming here, but maybe the difference is, Germany declared war on the United States after their ally bombed our Pacific Fleet. Having war declared on you will probably lead to more “progressive steps” being taken than if you were watching two  countries on the other side of the world, neither of them including you, in a military conflict.

Winning this conflict, in dominant fashion, will go a long ways to prevent a direct conflict between the US and/or Russia/China.  In fact, one could argue we are in a "world war," now.  The west vs Russia, China, NK, Iran and Chechyna.  What percentage of the World's population lives in those countries?

[Gatorubet 29,789]

8 minutes ago, Parliament said:

We should do that.

Winning this conflict, in dominant fashion, will go a long ways to prevent a direct conflict between the US and/or Russia/China.  In fact, one could argue we are in a "world war," now.  The west vs Russia, China, NK, Iran and Chechyna.  What percentage of the World's population lives in those countries?

Which is worse - the draft mobilization in America - or the gas and food ration cards they force upon us? 

Maybe I have a minority view, but I firmly believe it is in Europe’s best interest to think that America won’t come through to the extent they want. This is leading to a very expanded partnership between European countries increasing their military budgets, acquiring more military equipment and cooperating between other European partners (joint production of ammunition and tanks and tank, repair facilities, etc. ) for their own defense.  

Given the vagaries of American politics, I think Europe would be better served being a bit starved, than to have Uncle Sam dump all of the goodies on Ukraine while Europe watches us.  I see an upside for this strategy, although it is certainly not a present day upside for Ukraine. Europe will emerge from this strong enough to essentially be able to take on Russia itself and not back down - regardless of America’s future involvement. This is a good thing long term, and a rather seismic shift politically.  

This theoretically would leave us with the ability to direct more of our military assets toward a future China threat.   As always, I could be completely full of shit.

[MillerEP 30,277]

 

[Sawbonz 26,904]

1 hour ago, Nathan Jessep said:

So what would you propose to do, short of us getting directly involved?  I don’t think anything changes without providing more advanced weapons systems. Maybe we should do that. 
 

There’s also the issue of funding it all. We’ve appropriated $111B over 18 months. That’s a $74B run rate. To make it to next August 20th and really make a push I think that’s another $100B. Unfortunately it will be a political issue. 

Very poor username to post content correlation 

[MillerEP 30,277]

 

[956 Worldwide 34,019]

1 hour ago, Nathan Jessep said:

So what would you propose to do, short of us getting directly involved?  I don’t think anything changes without providing more advanced weapons systems. Maybe we should do that. 
 

There’s also the issue of funding it all. We’ve appropriated $111B over 18 months. That’s a $74B run rate. To make it to next August 20th and really make a push I think that’s another $100B. Unfortunately it will be a political issue. 

We can start by ensuring we no longer dither over certain systems for weeks and months only to provide it anyway. We can stop slow-rolling the things we do donate. We need to eliminate the requirement that our systems not be used to strike military targets in Russia, and we need to open the arsenal (ATACMS especially) for systems that can do that. Basically, it should all be on the table unless the AFU really can’t use it or if having it fall into RU hands would damage our own security (no F-35s, etc).  Again, there needs to be the big think. How would we go about accomplishing the task of kicking out Russia under those parameters? Arm AFU accordingly. 
 

And there needs to be better messaging. We need to lean in and treat this matter like beating this Nazis in 1940. There needs to be clarity on the accounting. And we need an 80 plus year old POTUS to lean into legacy and not politics and explain to the American people that the results of this war will be far more important to our world and America than the current budget.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12,301]

34 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

 

"Doesn't matter, won't move the needle."

[956 Worldwide 34,019]

52 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Which is worse - the draft mobilization in America - or the gas and food ration cards they force upon us? 

Maybe I have a minority view, but I firmly believe it is in Europe’s best interest to think that America won’t come through to the extent they want. This is leading to a very expanded partnership between European countries increasing their military budgets, acquiring more military equipment and cooperating between other European partners (joint production of ammunition and tanks and tank, repair facilities, etc. ) for their own defense.  

Given the vagaries of American politics, I think Europe would be better served being a bit starved, than to have Uncle Sam dump all of the goodies on Ukraine while Europe watches us.  I see an upside for this strategy, although it is certainly not a present day upside for Ukraine. Europe will emerge from this strong enough to essentially be able to take on Russia itself and not back down - regardless of America’s future involvement. This is a good thing long term, and a rather seismic shift politically.  

This theoretically would leave us with the ability to direct more of our military assets toward a future China threat.   As always, I could be completely full of shit.

The issue with this, and I’m in my lane here, is that Europe’s industrial base and stocks aren’t enough and their political will is united only so long as the United States leads. We’d have to be willing to accept that the Europeans would be far more likely to advocate for and enforce a deal that is bad for Ukraine, bad for Europe, and good for Russia. This tack was what Russia hoped to happen when they launched the war and (no CR just truth) it’s why they want a DJT as POTUS. 
 

Security leadership of the largest and riches economic bloc in the world is not a given. And it’s a strategic strength. But you have to exercise that leadership when it counts. 

[956 Worldwide 34,019]

4 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

"Doesn't matter, won't move the needle."

Clarity: Netherlands doesn’t have 42 to give. This is a total they have committed in coalition with the Danes and might include purchases elsewhere. 

[Parliament 14,022]

Q: What would you have done to stop the Nazi's in 1939?

A: You're doing it now.

So the Dutch are gonna go buy F16's and give them to Ukraine?  Seems they remember 1939 very well.

Edited August 20, 2023 by Parliament

[Parliament 14,022]

Re: the food/gas rationing piece.  The US is a net exporter of food and petroleum products.  Short of nuclear war I don't know how it would ever come to rationing.