Jump to content

Русский корабль - иди нахуй


Eastwood

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Gatorubet said:

Do NOT test me asshole!  

I will turn trans, steal your woman, and we will drink wine while sharing intimate thoughts and make fun of your purse-shoes combo.

Hahaha, maybe we just threesome instead. You know like John Lennon peace and harmony imagine all the people. Shit like that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Bolverk referred to me as a “high energy geezer” back then when MFCDG and Mr. B came by the Crescent City and met me for lunch and booze.  I shudder to think what the descriptor would be now.  

Sir, I believe I called you a "spry geezer." Thanks for the dinner, by the way. I still owe you.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, troph said:

Hahaha, maybe we just threesome instead. You know like John Lennon peace and harmony imagine all the people. Shit like that?

I thought he was more of the “I’d rather see you dead little girl than to see you with another man” type. 

You do not want a threesome. Historically, having sex with me would ensure that any bisexual would go stone lesbian.  I used to get pretty hefty monthly checks from both Subaru and U-Haul.   

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

I thought he was more of the “I’d rather see you dead little girl than to see you with another man” type. 

You do not want a threesome. Historically, having sex with me would ensure that any bisexual would go stone lesbian.  I used to get pretty hefty monthly checks from both Subaru and U-Haul.   

Bahahaha 

no chance of stone lezzies here. Just good looking enough to interest men but not enough to be porn stars. Though an only fans or some other web cam duo was our back up for lawyer rate income when we were both in our 40’s.

Ok Sorries. Back to the war effort….

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

5 hours ago, bolverk said:

When I was seeing MFCDG and going through some other "rough patches," my preference was to document/share the idiocy on the old scat site.

No video, though. Thank gawd.

I had forgotten about that whole saga. It was something.

I think your in the Big Spring area now? If you ever need something brought up- I make my way to Santa Fe or Pagosa about 8 times a year. Sometimes more. As long as it's quick

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

2 hours ago, bolverk said:

Sir, I believe I called you a "spry geezer." Thanks for the dinner, by the way. I still owe you.

No, sir, you don’t.   That lunch was the functional equivalent of Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride on mushrooms.   It’s value was inestimable.

Sadly, it (Blind Pelican) did not survive Covid.  The go-to happy hour for cheap oysters now should be Superior Seafood on Saint Charles and Napoleon. 

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

5 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

What you call “rough patches” I call “premium entertainment.” Watching MFCDG lurch back from the lady’s room with toilet paper streaming from the back of her pantyhose…and her stealing my steak knife “for protection” was a glimpse into a world that was fun to watch… but only because I was on the periphery of it. 

Sounds like my wheelehouse.

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

Is it my imagination, or is Surly even saltier than normal lately?  We have always been a hive of scum and villainy, but it seems like recently we have kicked it up a notch. Myself definitely included.

half of the NFC east was in the NFC championship game and none were them cowboys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

Is it my imagination, or is Surly even saltier than normal lately?  We have always been a hive of scum and villainy, but it seems like recently we have kicked it up a notch. Myself definitely included.

The transition for some on here over the years from fun loving to old man yelling at clouds has been pretty drastic..  

Edited by Hook1997
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, troph said:

Bahahaha 

no chance of stone lezzies here. Just good looking enough to interest men but not enough to be porn stars. Though an only fans or some other web cam duo was our back up for lawyer rate income when we were both in our 40’s.

Ok Sorries. Back to the war effort….

image.png.3f4dcb0290088276f4ae07331e37a70e.png

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.threads.net/@nafo_wrangler/post/DFYcIFyMJH0?xmt=AQGzGTPXo9znM6Wfh3S4BoRnP8Xp7pFzx_DQJZVbMglnSA

Current state of the Russian astronaut training program

 

https://www.threads.net/@nafo_wrangler/post/DFYcwoHM4-W?xmt=AQGz3nXBFR0cypa_miMudu8cb4rwngjndAlHv7w6EqmAcA

Lyudinovo, Kaluga Region. Something big is burning badly after drone strikes
Site unconfirmed so far

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, troph said:

Ukraines seem to be targeting really important strategic targets when is this war going to turn? 

Same answer as 2.5 years ago: when Ukraine has as many (better- more) artillery shells as the Russians have. 
 
The U.S. has the industrial capacity to produce that many, but it would require a financial commitment. Europe has the industrial capacity as well, but that would require a financial commitment. There are political reasons that one of Ukraine’s backers have stepped up, basically domestic butter prioritized over Ukraine guns. Politicians are really good at explaining why something is someone else’s responsibility. 
 
Also- the major European national governments all seem near collapse and are walking a fine line. 
 
I think their calculations are wrong. Know what’s going to cost more than arming Ukraine at a higher level than Russia? Defense costs if the Ukrainian defense collapses and Russia breaks through. If that happens, there will be millions of Ukrainian refugees (the Ukrainians know what Russia does- they rape the women, shoot the men and send the children east). With Russia farther west, the Euros will be forced to increase annual defense higher than a measly 2% of GDP. 

Edited by statsman
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, statsman said:

Same answer as 2.5 years ago: when Ukraine has as many (better- more) artillery shells as the Russians have. 
 
The U.S. has the industrial capacity to produce that many, but it would require a financial commitment. Europe has the industrial capacity as well, but that would require a financial commitment. There are political reasons that one of Ukraine’s backers have stepped up, basically domestic butter prioritized over Ukraine guns. Politicians are really good at explaining why something is someone else’s responsibility. 
 
Also- the major European national governments all seem near collapse and are walking a fine line. 
 
I think their calculations are wrong. Know what’s going to cost more than arming Ukraine at a higher level than Russia? Defense costs if the Ukrainian defense collapses and Russia breaks through. If that happens, there will be millions of Ukrainian refugees (the Ukrainians know what Russia does- they rape the women, shoot the men and send the children east). With Russia farther west, the Euros will be forced to increase annual defense higher than a measly 2% of GDP. 

I think you overestimate our ability to quickly create new factories and supply pipelines for artillery shells. Money alone doesn't create those. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I think you overestimate our ability to quickly create new factories and supply pipelines for artillery shells. Money alone doesn't create those. 

Turkey has 230 F16s and the US has 840. Together, we could supply 70 planes and train Ukranian pilots and provide enough weapons for them from stockpiles without putting a dent in our military capabilities. We have 12,000 JASSMs, 170,000 AGM-114 Hellfire, 500 AGM-130, 5000  AGM-65 Maverick, and probably 1500 AGM-88. Would we miss 3000 missiles?

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I think you overestimate our ability to quickly create new factories and supply pipelines for artillery shells. Money alone doesn't create those. 

In 1941, before Pearl Harbor, the U.S. realized it needed bombers, lots of them. It signed a contract with Convair to buy as many B-24’s as they could build, 39 per month. As the U.S. entered the war, it realized it needed more, so Convair doubled production by building a new plant in Fort Worth (that’s why locals of a certain age still call it “the Bomber Plant”, even though it has built fighters for almost 60 years). 
 
Knowing that still wouldn’t be enough, the Army signed Ford to build bombers in their Willow Run plant (war time rationing pretty much starved civilian car production). The Convair engineers struggled to conceive of higher rate production, while Ford engineers struggled to imagine production as slow as a bomber per day. By the spring of 1944, 2.5 years after Pearl Harbor, Willow Run was completing one B-24 per hour, 24 hours per day, seven days per week. Each B-24 weighed 18 tons, empty, had four engines and tens of thousands of hand bucked rivets. 
 
That was 80 years ago. This year, we are about to see a different kind of motivated development program, as the U.S. takes on the AI challenge from China. 
 
We have seen Lunar missions planned and executed in 10 years. We have seen a vaccine to a novel virus developed in eight months. 
 
Maybe I don’t know what I’m talking about (but I think I do). It wasn’t funding that kept the U.S. (or the UK, or Germany or France) from matching Russia in artillery shell production (remember- the Russkis had to ramp up to their current level). It was funding and commitment. 

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

19 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Turkey has 230 F16s and the US has 840. Together, we could supply 70 planes and train Ukranian pilots and provide enough weapons for them from stockpiles without putting a dent in our military capabilities. We have 12,000 JASSMs, 170,000 AGM-114 Hellfire, 500 AGM-130, 5000  AGM-65 Maverick, and probably 1500 AGM-88. Would we miss 3000 missiles?

We have excess air power, that is true. Russia focused on artillery. The question asked about artillery shells, so I pointed out that increasing our production isn't as simple as securing the monetary commitment. There is going to be a time element. Even if we had unlimited money to throw at it, we still likely wouldn't be able to match Russian artillery production within a year. 

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

54 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Fun with grenades - might be a little too brutal (or tempting, depending on how you feel this week)

 

Holy shit, somebody has compiled a list of videos of Russians offing themselves, and they have found 195 so far (and admit they are missing plenty)

Reddit - Dive into anything

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

5 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

We have excess air power, that is true. Russia focused on artillery. The question asked about artillery shells, so I pointed out that increasing our production isn't as simple as securing the monetary commitment. There is going to be a time element. Even if we had unlimited money to throw at it, we still likely wouldn't be able to match Russian artillery production within a year. 

Oh, we can increase our production of artillery or alternatively decrease their supply.

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

3 hours ago, Bevo said:

Oh, we can increase our production of artillery or alternatively decrease their supply.

I don’t know, so much, that “we” includes the U.S., anymore  

Three years ago, Russia was in a similar position to NATO, with respect to artillery production. As their initial schitzkrieg stalled, and the war settled into its current form, they also realized they needed more shells. Like Ukraine, they scrounged for shells from partners and used up stores. They also committed to production expansion. Now, Russia has all the shells they need, as inaccurate and unreliable as they are. As Stalin said, “Quantity has a quality of its own”. 
 
NATO/ the west/the U.S. could have matches (and exceeded!) Russia. Look at this list of ranked economies:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)
 
Russia has the 11th largest. I count five NATO nations with larger economies, individually. The reason that Ukraine’s allies aren’t giving more shells to Ukraine is not that they aren’t capable. It is that they prioritized other things higher. 
 
Russia can win this. If Ukraine’s allies continue to twiddle their thumbs and look at each other to take the lead, the Ukrainian defenses can collapse. If that happens, you will see a flood of refugees. 
 
Russia’s economy is a mess- high inflation, collapsing currency, high interest rates. Funny fact- Germany’s economy was similar in 1938: with the economic growth from rearmament stalling out, there were too many marks chasing too few goods (industry was hindered by troop mobilization). Taking Czechoslovakia solved the German economic problems; now there were plenty of good for the marks to purchase. The same thing can save Russia’s economy. 
 
The “west” better decide tout suite if that kind of future is unbearable. The time for doing something about it is almost past. 

Edited by statsman
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, statsman said:

In 1941, before Pearl Harbor, the U.S. realized it needed bombers, lots of them. It signed a contract with Convair to buy as many B-24’s as they could build, 39 per month. As the U.S. entered the war, it realized it needed more, so Convair doubled production by building a new plant in Fort Worth (that’s why locals of a certain age still call it “the Bomber Plant”, even though it has built fighters for almost 60 years). 
 
Knowing that still wouldn’t be enough, the Army signed Ford to build bombers in their Willow Run plant (war time rationing pretty much starved civilian car production). The Convair engineers struggled to conceive of higher rate production, while Ford engineers struggled to imagine production as slow as a bomber per day. By the spring of 1944, 2.5 years after Pearl Harbor, Willow Run was completing one B-24 per hour, 24 hours per day, seven days per week. Each B-24 weighed 18 tons, empty, had four engines and tens of thousands of hand bucked rivets. 
 
That was 80 years ago. This year, we are about to see a different kind of motivated development program, as the U.S. takes on the AI challenge from China. 
 
We have seen Lunar missions planned and executed in 10 years. We have seen a vaccine to a novel virus developed in eight months. 
 
Maybe I don’t know what I’m talking about (but I think I do). It wasn’t funding that kept the U.S. (or the UK, or Germany or France) from matching Russia in artillery shell production (remember- the Russkis had to ramp up to their current level). It was funding and commitment. 

That doesn't sound very cost efficient, we tore down our manufacturing capacity in the name of lower costs and outsourcing. It's gonna be a longer run-up to build new plants and get production going, not to mention actually paying workers above poverty wages

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

13 minutes ago, Captainant said:

That doesn't sound very cost efficient, we tore down our manufacturing capacity in the name of lower costs and outsourcing. It's gonna be a longer run-up to build new plants and get production going, not to mention actually paying workers above poverty wages

Is it less cost efficient than the future we will be in, if Ukraine loses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 1941, before Pearl Harbor, the U.S. realized it needed bombers, lots of them. It signed a contract with Convair to buy as many B-24’s as they could build, 39 per month. As the U.S. entered the war, it realized it needed more, so Convair doubled production by building a new plant in Fort Worth (that’s why locals of a certain age still call it “the Bomber Plant”, even though it has built fighters for almost 60 years). 
 
Knowing that still wouldn’t be enough, the Army signed Ford to build bombers in their Willow Run plant (war time rationing pretty much starved civilian car production). The Convair engineers struggled to conceive of higher rate production, while Ford engineers struggled to imagine production as slow as a bomber per day. By the spring of 1944, 2.5 years after Pearl Harbor, Willow Run was completing one B-24 per hour, 24 hours per day, seven days per week. Each B-24 weighed 18 tons, empty, had four engines and tens of thousands of hand bucked rivets. 
 
That was 80 years ago. This year, we are about to see a different kind of motivated development program, as the U.S. takes on the AI challenge from China. 
 
We have seen Lunar missions planned and executed in 10 years. We have seen a vaccine to a novel virus developed in eight months. 
 
Maybe I don’t know what I’m talking about (but I think I do). It wasn’t funding that kept the U.S. (or the UK, or Germany or France) from matching Russia in artillery shell production (remember- the Russkis had to ramp up to their current level). It was funding and commitment. 

In other words, political and popular will has to coalesce around a goal.

We need a real leader to show the people that. Explain it in say, a fireside chat or a speech at Rice. Alas…
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, statsman said:

Is it less cost efficient than the future we will be in, if Ukraine loses?

I agree wholeheartedly with you, but nothing about our latest round of executive orders is consistent with that sort of long term thinking. Nevermind that the president never really had Ukraine's defense as a priority. He's already attempted to withhold congressionally appropriated aid to Ukraine back in 2018, and is actively attacking the Impoundment Act to enable that generally.

I guess I'm saying, I don't think the pieces are getting lined up to be favorable to Ukrainian defense. Even IF the US wanted to jump in with both feet, I don't think we would be able to. We can't even make fuckin deli meat without fucking it up

Edited by Captainant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I agree wholeheartedly with you, but nothing about our latest round of executive orders is consistent with that sort of long term thinking. Nevermind that the president never really had Ukraine's defense as a priority. He's already attempted to withhold congressionally appropriated aid to Ukraine back in 2018, and is actively attacking the Impoundment Act to enable that generally.

I guess I'm saying, I don't think the pieces are getting lined up to be favorable to Ukrainian defense. Even IF the US wanted to jump in with both feet, I don't we would be able to. We can't even make fuckin deli meat without fucking it up

I can’t argue with you, and I am very disappointed in where the U.S. seems to be on this. 
 
Ukraine needs Europe to step up, but I don’t know that they can. Internal politics makes it hard for the UK, Germany and France to make the required commitment and EU budgetary requirements (designed to support the Euro as a currency) gives all but the UK an excuse to not mobilize. You could argue that they are behaving worse than they did 1936-1938. 
 
Mark Twain is said to have stated, “History doesn’t repeat, but it does rhyme”. It’s certainly rhyming now. 
 
The only saving grace is that Russia has a schitzkrieg, instead of a blitzkrieg. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • 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.



×
×
  • Create New...