Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[InkaUtexas 25495]

Yep, and add to that those who demobilize and there is no longer any work. Hey, I can work for GAZPROM as a security asset. BAM, next thing he knows he is on the front. Once you sign you are in. 

[InkaUtexas 25495]

Zelensky to the UK today. Speaking to Parliament. 

Rumor is UK will open up flight training for NATO aircraft. 

Hell yeah. 

[KYHorn 16856]

 

 

Edited February 8, 2023 by KYHorn

[KYHorn 16856]

3 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

Zelensky to the UK today. Speaking to Parliament. 

Rumor is UK will open up flight training for NATO aircraft. 

Hell yeah. 

He'll also meet King Charles and speak at the European Parliament in Brussels.

https://www.spiegel.de/ausland/ukrainischer-praesident-selenskyj-reist-ueberraschend-nach-grossbritannien-a-69cf639f-36f1-4762-8c58-45da79c9521d?d=1675845302&sara_ecid=app_upd_903PVrz5TZlGJuLWLqJDVijRko558t&sara_ecid=soci_upd_KsBF0AFjflf0DZCxpPYDCQgO1dEMph

 

[KYHorn 16856]

 

 

 

[KYHorn 16856]

Oh shit

Edit: LonGER range weapons

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-politics-64566762?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=63e375e304caa552cb12dda4%26UK's latest package cements long-term support%2C Sunak says%262023-02-08T10%3A19%3A40.783Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:85066c76-e8c2-45f4-adf5-7c36ce3c64bd&pinned_post_asset_id=63e375e304caa552cb12dda4&pinned_post_type=share 

Edited February 8, 2023 by KYHorn

[956 Worldwide 34419]

3 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

Zelensky to the UK today. Speaking to Parliament. 

Rumor is UK will open up flight training for NATO aircraft. 

Hell yeah. 

This will be interesting to watch.  The UK operates the Eurofighter Typhoon and the F-35 as its combat aircraft.  The F-35 is not an option for Ukraine. The Typhoon might be, especially as the UK is planning to withdraw its Tranche 1 aircraft from service. It is not as attractive as the F-16 from a numbers standpoint or the Saab Gripen operationally. 
 

Their trainer for pilots that will go into fast jets is the BAE Hawk T1 and T2.  That’s what would make sense to train them on and they could then move into whatever NATO platform is made available. 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11668]

8 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Kasparov and professor Bobbitt (who worked, umm, VERY closely with one of my classmates back in the day):

My guess is that number is a lot bigger than one.  

Kasparov basically sounds like this thread, which makes me sort of proud.  

[Parliament 14125]

4 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

Zelensky to the UK today. Speaking to Parliament. 

Rumor is UK will open up flight training for NATO aircraft. 

Hell yeah. 

We talk every 2 weeks or so.  Cool guy.

[KYHorn 16856]

 

 

 

[KYHorn 16856]

 

Some good lines: 

Edited February 8, 2023 by KYHorn

[KYHorn 16856]

 

[686 3404]

Long article quoting anonymous sources saying the US placed and remote detonated bombs on the Nordstream pipelines. Kinda reads like fan fiction and Seymour Hersh may be a nut but I guess seemingly plausible:

https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream?utm_medium=android

If true, impressive that our guys pulled it off but extremely risky politically.

[Schulz2.0 28764]

11 minutes ago, 686 said:

Long article quoting anonymous sources saying the US placed and remote detonated bombs on the Nordstream pipelines. Kinda reads like fan fiction and Seymour Hersh may be a nut but I guess seemingly plausible:

https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream?utm_medium=android

If true, impressive that our guys pulled it off but extremely risky politically.

Hersch isn't particularly credible. 

[KYHorn 16856]

11 minutes ago, 686 said:

Long article quoting anonymous sources saying the US placed and remote detonated bombs on the Nordstream pipelines. Kinda reads like fan fiction and Seymour Hersh may be a nut but I guess seemingly plausible:

https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream?utm_medium=android

If true, impressive that our guys pulled it off but extremely risky politically.

Yeah, I'm pretty skeptical, given the administration's reluctance to do anything aggressive. We wouldn't consider giving tanks at the time, but we'd blow up a key pipeline? 

 

 

[SydneyCarton 47843]

15 minutes ago, 686 said:

Long article quoting anonymous sources saying the US placed and remote detonated bombs on the Nordstream pipelines. Kinda reads like fan fiction and Seymour Hersh may be a nut but I guess seemingly plausible:

https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream?utm_medium=android

If true, impressive that our guys pulled it off but extremely risky politically.

Today I learned that ManInBlack's name is Seymour Hersh. 

[texasdago 7552]

8 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

Hersch isn't particularly credible. 

yeah...

On June 25, 2017, Welt am Sonntag published Hersh's article "Trump's Red Line".^[56] This had been rejected by the London Review of Books.^[57][58] He said there was a split between the U.S. intelligence community and president Donald Trump over the alleged 'sarin attack' at the rebel-held town of Khan Shaykhun in Idlib on April 4, 2017: "Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon".^[56][59] Bellingcat accused Hersh of sloppy journalism: "Hersh based his case on a tiny number of anonymous sources, presented no other evidence to support his case, and ignored or dismissed evidence that countered the alternative narrative he was trying to build."^[60] Journalist George Monbiot criticized Hersh for not giving the building coordinates to enable verification from satellite imagery and for relying on refuted analysis by Ted Postol.^[61]

[Hefeweizen 5307]

Personally I’m a fan of his brother, Seymour Butts.

 

 Good post on Kasparov who has always been an interesting read, and particularly prescient on Russia politics.

[Bevo 13523]

10 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

So, went to the Kasparov event tonight. It was fantastic. He didn’t pussyfoot around, he went right into discussing Ukraine, Russia, etc.

I took notes of particularly interesting points; Lobo criticized me for having my face in my phone at times, but I was typing.

Below are my raw notes, I ain’t a court reporter.

——————

In the last few years, so many politicians have turned into clowns, and a comedian has become a hero.

We must judge things relatively. Maybe the dollar has weakness, but the other currencies are weaker.

Ukraine is the frontline of freedom, in the never-ending battle between freedom and tyranny.

Why was Putin so wrong about how Ukraine would receive him? Goes back to 1994, and Yeltsin, and him launching the war in Chechnya. At the same time, Ukraine saw something Russia never has - a peaceful transition of power. For all its ills, it had a civil society that would not accept a ruler they did not choose.

They demonstrate to us that there are values worth fighting and dying for.

Americans got it wrong - thought that Ukraine would fold in two weeks, so we shouldn’t give them weapons that will end up in Russian hands.

Dictators lie about what they did, but they are always telling us what they are GOING to do, accurately (see Mein Kampf).

One of Putin’s first acts - restoring Soviet anthem. It’s a symbol, but dictators need symbols. He remained reserved about his plans, because he wasn’t ready to move on them. Kasparov knew what he was going to do if ever given the chance, and he’s gotten it.

Skyrocketing oil prices gave Russian people a taste of “normal life.” McDonald’s, etc. It MUST be a democracy, right?

The parallels between 2014 Russia (Sochi Olympics) and 1936 Germany (Berlin Olympics) were strong. And people overlooked these rising problems because business is business, and we ignore the lessons of history. 20 months after 1936 games, Hitler annexed Austria. 20 DAYS after Sochi, Putin annexed Crimea.

Weakness from Obama and red lines. Merkel said we can’t get off German gas, she had 16 years. Turns out they could get off Russian gas in 10 days. Weakness of western leaders emboldened Putin.

Putin has an army, money, and nukes, yes. But let’s go back to 1941. Great things happen due to leadership or lack thereof.

January 1943, Casablanca conference, set the goal of “unconditional surrender,” which took political will.

The challenge of Stalin taking over West Berlin. For 11 months, allied leadership defeated him. I am a Berliner. Tear down this wall. Leadership moments. How can you expect a wall to come down that’s been here so long? Bold leaders push it.

Now, when people look at America, they don’t know what it is. We used to have a consistent policy approach when it came to the Cold War. We are still a factor, but it depends on who is in the White House.

The aid we provide is much less than Ukraine needs, but much more than Putin expects.

Tucker Carlson is Russian propaganda - is he parroting them, or are they parroting him?

Our fear of China sounds exactly like our concern about a rising Japan in the 80s. Yet for all we fear China, they couldn’t come up with a decent vax, we did.

The remedy to these problems is freedom and creativity that comes with it.

What has surprised him? The volume of the genocidal crimes committed in Ukraine. And how many Russians accept it. They don’t WANT to know the alternative (true) viewpoint. It’s a shield that protects their conscience.

Russian message now is that they have to deplete the Ukrainian forces, fight to the last Ukrainian. There’s already a quarter million dead soldiers, total. Went from 60,000 artillery rounds fired a day to 15-20k, though.

Re the warnings that the West is sleepwalking into WWIII - we are already in WWIII, Putin already decided that. This was never about Ukraine, which he doesn’t recognize as a true independent nation. It was an attack on the rest of the world, governed by treaties, agreements, and the rule of law. It’s about BEING the law, via might makes right. Indeed, some Russians thought WWIII was the Cold War, which they lost. This is WWIV. And we were sleepwalking, BEFORE this war.

He’s not playing chess. He’s playing Poker, with bluffing, and watching your opponents fold on your bluff time and again. He thought that the free world would fold, and he would have been right, but for Ukrainian leadership and courage.

Re: taking back Ukraine, is it an attack on Russian soil? We’re back to poker, and probabilities about the risk of escalation. Dictators move to take advantage of perceived weakness. He thought he could get away with it. Oh, and when you say it’s not a bluff…it’s a bluff. All other dictators are watching this. Ukraine affects Taiwan’s fate. Ukraine’s victory would make dictators tremble, its loss will do the opposite. It even inspires the Iranian revolution - “I wish Russian men had the courage of Iranian women.”

He wants reparations to be paid, and war criminals brought to justice. And as long as Putin is in power, the war won’t end. Empires like that must expand, if they retreat, they collapse. War is the only justification for him remaining in power. The liberation of Ukraine is the first step to liberating Russia - true Russian patriots should be doing all the can to help Ukraine win.

How will it end and how is Ukriane succeeding? Freedom wins. He’s an optimist by nature, history doesn’t end. We know that evil doesn’t die. It may be dormant, but when we become complacent, it rises up. Ukraine wins because they are creative. He believes it ends this year (optimist), because attrition plays to Putin’s hands. We don’t want this war to be an issue in our presidential campaign. Victory for Ukraine is victory for Russia.

How and why does Putin leave (bullet, coup)? He’d rather not speculate, instead talk about what history shows us. Weakness, losing, is when he leaves.

Big difference between Russia and Ukraine: Russia is still an imperial mindset (comes with conquest, expansion). Ukraine has shifted to a statehood view. Russia has to make that shift.

The only way to wake up Russian society is a decisive military defeat. The Russian public needs to understand that the age of Russian empire is over. There are parts of Russia that will break away. If it makes the transition from empire to national state, it will be smaller. We don’t know the outcome of the collapse of the Russian empire exactly. We don’t know how and when it will end, but it will end.
He will fall because his powers will fail. Dictators need a myth, and a loss shatters that myth (loss of Crimea would do that).

Will leadership go along with him if he wants to use nukes? What would a mafia do? Dying for and with him is not what they’re interested in.

Interesting question to him: What is a downside of being intelligent? Frustration. What seems obvious to him, why don’t others see it? He also knows the limits of his skills, he knows what he’s good at and what he’s bad at.

Do you believe Ukraine can win without sustained western support, and will we support them long and strong enough? No, they need our support across the board. But they really don’t need that much. Most of our aid is weapons sitting in storage. They just need what we have in stock. It is not a charitable contribution - THIS is the war that NATO has been preparing for since 1949. The planned battlefield was the Rhine, now it’s the Dnipro. The principles are the same, Ukraine is doing what NATO was built for. Imagine, we can end the Russian problem by supplying Ukraine with our weapons. It’s crazy that it’s even a debate. It’s the greatest bargain imaginable.

This is our war. Putin is fighting us. He is fighting the world we live in, the world of the rule of law and norms that has made us successful and prosperous.

—————
Lots to digest. Really interesting stuff from a voice who has been sounding the alarm on Putin’s plans for over 20 years.

This got me thinking about after the war. If Russia falls, we will have a whole other problem. As Kasparov stated, western Russia should be fine - St. Petersburg, Moscow will be fine. Other parts of the country will splinter. So, China will try to gain territory in the Southeast and Japan will take islands. Are we going to just allow China to take oil rich lands? What can we do to stop it? Will China start causing issues for Japan? It seems like if this is WWIII, then we may be moving closer to WWIV with the fall of Russia. Everyone keeps worrying about nuclear weapons on the black market with the fall of Russia. I think there are other concerns as well.

[SydneyCarton 47843]

3 minutes ago, Bevo said:

This got me thinking about after the war. If Russia falls, we will have a whole other problem. As Kasparov stated, western Russia should be fine - St. Petersburg, Moscow will be fine. Other parts of the country will splinter. So, China will try to gain territory in the Southeast and Japan will take islands. Are we going to just allow China to take oil rich lands? What can we do to stop it? Will China start causing issues for Japan? It seems like if this is WWIII, then we may be moving closer to WWIV with the fall of Russia. Everyone keeps worrying about nuclear weapons on the black market with the fall of Russia. I think there are other concerns as well.

People have been worried about nuclear weapons on the black market since the call of the Soviet Union. So far we've seen zero to indicate it's a real problem. And I'd think that if there were ever a time for a few to have hit the black market, it would be during this complete raping of the Russian military by Oligarchs. I don't see how the fall of Russia makes it any more likely than the fall of the Soviet Union, much less right now with war. 

I'm not sure how we'd stop China from taking anything, or if we should. That seems like a different can of worms. Support the reconstruction of Ukraine, integrate them into the Western system with their also abundance of natural resources, and call it a day. China buying cheap oil from Russia at this point isn't all that different from China owning the Russian land that supplies cheap oil, at this point, imo. 

Pretty sure if China starts fucking with Japan, well, that's an issue. But I also see it as independent of the fall of Russia. That's picking a fight. They'll pick the fight of Taiwan first, and the end result is the same: War. In short, all the things you've expressed seem to be concerns that exist independent of the fall of Russia. 

[atomheartbevo 89405]

9 minutes ago, Bevo said:

It seems like if this is WWIII, then we may be moving closer to WWIV with the fall of Russia. Everyone keeps worrying about nuclear weapons on the black market with the fall of Russia. I think there are other concerns as well.

Regardless of the outcome in Ukraine, once Putin is gone by natural causes or a coup or assassination, there is nothing in place for anybody to succeed him.  He’s killed off or jailed or pushed out anybody who could conceivably replace him.  Shit will get real dicey then unless somebody has a firm grip over the military (and Putin set it up so that no one leader in the military would present even a remote threat to him).

[BamaATL 16592]

8 minutes ago, Bevo said:

This got me thinking about after the war. If Russia falls, we will have a whole other problem. As Kasparov stated, western Russia should be fine - St. Petersburg, Moscow will be fine. Other parts of the country will splinter. So, China will try to gain territory in the Southeast and Japan will take islands. Are we going to just allow China to take oil rich lands? What can we do to stop it? Will China start causing issues for Japan? It seems like if this is WWIII, then we may be moving closer to WWIV with the fall of Russia. Everyone keeps worrying about nuclear weapons on the black market with the fall of Russia. I think there are other concerns as well.

When Russia fails, not if.  The funny thing about projection is that as we all know it typically speaks to your own insecurities.  When putin says that Ukraine isn't a country, he's projecting; the truth is its the Russian Federation that isn't a country.  It has 22 republics within it, with other internal divisions that are even further complicated.  Moscow has always operated from a bully pulpit to keep these areas more or less in line (while allowing some small measures of autonomy).  Without the ability to bully, this all falls apart and quickly.  What happens when China takes much of Siberia, probably nothing.  Long term this would set a bad precedent, but I'm not sure what if anything we could do, save sanctions.  

[686 3404]

Hersh is definitely “out there” and his theory is questionable because he has only one anonymous source, etc. But it is interesting to me that: there is still no official word on who blew up the pipelines; it took skill that only a few actors could pull off; the winners and losers as a result of the action are pretty clear; whoever gave the “go-ahead” was either very confident they wouldn’t get caught / didn’t care / has very high risk tolerance.

I think those are reasons a lot of folks (myself included) think it’s very unlikely the US did it: we’re bad at keeping secrets and it would probably get leaked; Russia (and Germany?) would demand and be owed compensation; political fallout very risky; etc. That’s why Russia was such a likely actor (its their infrastructure, they can keep secrets, Putin has no fear even if it does come out). Only problem is it’s a little hard to define how Russia benefitted from them being blown up.

[Brisketexan 104549]

20 minutes ago, Hefeweizen said:

Good post on Kasparov who has always been an interesting read, and particularly prescient on Russia politics.

And man, here's the thing, as I'm listening to this bonafide genius, one of the most brilliant people of the past half century, speak, I'm thinking to myself "yep.  yeah.  No shit.  Uh huh.  Yep, that's what I thought too.  And yes, that's what I think now."  Which leads you to think "well, shit....I must be a super brain genius TOO!"  Then, as you pause, you realize the humbling truth: "shit, if I can figure this shit out.....maybe it wasn't that hard to figure out at all."

Which DOES make it even more vexing that others don't seem to get it.  You don't have to be a Kasparov-level genius to get this shit -- after all, a bunch of assholes on a web forum devoted to football and cracks about South Austin's mom seem to get it.  So why don't MORE people get it?

Also, I forgot to bring an umbrella last night, and had a 10 minute walk back to my car in the pouring rain.  I looked and felt like a wet dog when I got back in my car.  Must have looked pretty pathetic, as I was walking down Speedway, some student gal looked at me and said "you know, this is a Safe Ride Campus, if you call, someone can give you a ride."  Fuck you, missy, I'm a man, I've been rain-soaked before, I can take it.

[Bevo 13523]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Fuck you, missy, I'm a man, I've been rain-soaked before, I can take it.

Did you think this to yourself or were you speaking out loud?

[Brisketexan 104549]

1 minute ago, Bevo said:

Did you think this to yourself or were you speaking out loud?

Yes.

[AUS-97HORN 11672]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

Yes.

you really missed the chance to proudly show your heritage and answer the question:

 

 

[The Dog 43788]

[KYHorn 16856]

 

 Two rage-inducing tweets that Scholz and other feet-draggers should be required to see.

[The Dog 43788]

 

[atomheartbevo 89405]

10 minutes ago, 686 said:

Hersh is definitely “out there” and his theory is questionable because he has only one anonymous source, etc. But it is interesting to me that: there is still no official word on who blew up the pipelines; it took skill that only a few actors could pull off; the winners and losers as a result of the action are pretty clear; whoever gave the “go-ahead” was either very confident they wouldn’t get caught / didn’t care / has very high risk tolerance.

I think those are reasons a lot of folks (myself included) think it’s very unlikely the US did it: we’re bad at keeping secrets and it would probably get leaked; Russia (and Germany?) would demand and be owed compensation; political fallout very risky; etc. That’s why Russia was such a likely actor (its their infrastructure, they can keep secrets, Putin has no fear even if it does come out). Only problem is it’s a little hard to define how Russia benefitted from them being blown up.

We talked about it back when it happened, but Putin/Russia loves to send messages.  Once it was clear that it was not going to be used, it’s just sitting there doing nothing for Russia.  Blowing it up says they have the ability to fuck with infrastructure well away from Russia and they get to use it as a false flag.

[956 Worldwide 34419]

Seymour Hersh, on his brand new substack created just for this piece: I didn’t want to have to deal with editors or fact checkers or anyone who might ask me who my one secret source is or any accountability at all: 

 

Quote

What you’ll find here is, I hope, a reflection of that freedom. The story you will read today is the truth as I worked for three months to find, with no pressure from a publisher, editors or peers to make it hew to certain lines of thought—or pare it back to assuage their fears. Substack simply means reporting is back . . . unfiltered and unprogrammed—just the way I like it.

https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/why-substack

[texasdago 7552]

I have to say... bummed out I didn't go to the Kasparov event.  Missed out on a great opportunity.

[wildcat09 29221]

I think this pretty much covers that nonsense:

 

 

[956 Worldwide 34419]

Hersh: This operation couldn’t use special forces, it had to use regular Navy. The President couldn’t risk briefing the Gang of 8:

Quote

There was a vital bureaucratic reason for relying on the graduates of the center’s hardcore diving school in Panama City. The divers were Navy only, and not members of America’s Special Forces Command, whose covert operations must be reported to Congress and briefed in advance to the Senate and House leadership—the so-called Gang of Eight. The Biden Administration was doing everything possible to avoid leaks as the planning took place late in 2021 and into the first months of 2022.

Also Hersh: “Jake Sullivan called the CIA and the Joint Chiefs and the State Department and also Treasury to come up with a plan. Then of course they had to tell the Norwegians, and then also they had to tell the Swedes and the Danes about part of it……

Edited February 8, 2023 by 956 Worldwide

[Chad Fuck 17552]

I think this pretty much covers that nonsense:
 
 

“Reading this must be what having a stroke feels like.”

- I say to myself at least ten times a day right here in this very place.

[Bevo 13523]

55 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

When Russia fails, not if.  The funny thing about projection is that as we all know it typically speaks to your own insecurities.  When putin says that Ukraine isn't a country, he's projecting; the truth is its the Russian Federation that isn't a country.  It has 22 republics within it, with other internal divisions that are even further complicated.  Moscow has always operated from a bully pulpit to keep these areas more or less in line (while allowing some small measures of autonomy).  Without the ability to bully, this all falls apart and quickly.  What happens when China takes much of Siberia, probably nothing.  Long term this would set a bad precedent, but I'm not sure what if anything we could do, save sanctions.  

Do you think we would stay out of the fray or would we want territory across from the Aleutian Islands (north of Japan)? I think we would prefer some sort of Japanese claim and for us to stay out of it. We would want some bases there, though.

 

 

[SydneyCarton 47843]

 

59 minutes ago, 686 said:

Hersh is definitely “out there” and his theory is questionable because he has only one anonymous source, etc. But it is interesting to me that: there is still no official word on who blew up the pipelines; it took skill that only a few actors could pull off; the winners and losers as a result of the action are pretty clear; whoever gave the “go-ahead” was either very confident they wouldn’t get caught / didn’t care / has very high risk tolerance.

I think those are reasons a lot of folks (myself included) think it’s very unlikely the US did it: we’re bad at keeping secrets and it would probably get leaked; Russia (and Germany?) would demand and be owed compensation; political fallout very risky; etc. That’s why Russia was such a likely actor (its their infrastructure, they can keep secrets, Putin has no fear even if it does come out). Only problem is it’s a little hard to define how Russia benefitted from them being blown up.

That’s easy, Putin miscalculated. Just like Ukraine welcoming them with open arms. He thought he’d squeeze and freeze Europe. But the opposite happened. 

[956 Worldwide 34419]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

 

That’s easy, Putin miscalculated. Just like Ukraine welcoming them with open arms. He thought he’d squeeze and freeze Europe. But the opposite happened. 

Well, and there’s the fact that Hersh neglected to mention— there were four pipes. Three explosions. 
 

Shortly after the blast, Russia announced that it could resume delivery but ONLY if Germany agreed to turn on the NS2 pipeline which they earlier decided not to start using or certify. 

[Bateshorn 9898]

4 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Well, and there’s the fact that Hersh neglected to mention— there were four pipes. Three explosions. 
 

Shortly after the blast, Russia announced that it could resume delivery but ONLY if Germany agreed to turn on the NS2 pipeline which they earlier decided not to start using or certify. 

This.  The Russians blew up the existing operational pipeline, with the intent of freeze and squeeze Europe, then proffer the "There's this other pipeline that's available, turn it on and let's get you all warm and hooked on our sweet, cheap NG again"  Sometimes this shit is not that hard. 

Edited February 8, 2023 by Bateshorn

[Chad Fuck 17552]

4 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Well, and there’s the fact that Hersh neglected to mention— there were four pipes. Three explosions. 
 

Shortly after the blast, Russia announced that it could resume delivery but ONLY if Germany agreed to turn on the NS2 pipeline which they earlier decided not to start using or certify. 

[686 3404]

 
That’s easy, Putin miscalculated. Just like Ukraine welcoming them with open arms. He thought he’d squeeze and freeze Europe. But the opposite happened. 

That’s probably the simplest/most likely explanation.

[BamaATL 16592]

30 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Do you think we would stay out of the fray or would we want territory across from the Aleutian Islands (north of Japan)? I think we would prefer some sort of Japanese claim and for us to stay out of it. We would want some bases there, though.

 

 

Long story short, I have no idea how we will react to all this.  I can say that if we wanted to restart colonialism, we would have done it starting 70ish years ago, and we wouldn't have stopped at a few Pacific Islands where we were more or less welcome (although, while a giant asshole, Patton was right, we should have just kept on marching to Moscow, and yes I realize war weary people wouldn't have gone for this).  So I'd be surprised if we had any true territorial aspirations.  It seems like its better policy for us to make allies that agree to have bases for us, rather than colonial conquerors.  With all that in mind, having amphibious beach head bases make little sense for us (as we have no invasion plans for anywhere); so no.  

Quite frankly, my bigger concern is with the precedent.  If Xi takes Siberia, on the one hand oh well fuck russia, right?  In the short term, sure fuck russia.  In the long term (and perhaps even immediately), what does this tell another strongman?  In the immediate chaos during this event does Modi try to retake Bangladesh, Kashmir, etc (just spit balling, I no idea if those are even stated goals of his, I don't think they are).  All we do know, is that when we fail to act in one area of the world, it inevitably leads to unintended consequence.  

I agree with Kasparov, we are already in WW3.  However, I personally look at russia as being the modern day equivalent of Italy.  Mussolini may have been the model for the fascists at the beginning, but in the end he was just a broken down stooge.  putin strikes me as this, and the real danger is Xi.  I think Ukraine is a precursor for a wider conflict.  

[The Dog 43788]

 

 

[RDCanecutter 26246]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

 

Also, I forgot to bring an umbrella last night, and had a 10 minute walk back to my car in the pouring rain.  I looked and felt like a wet dog when I got back in my car.  Must have looked pretty pathetic, as I was walking down Speedway, some student gal looked at me and said "you know, this is a Safe Ride Campus, if you call, someone can give you a ride."  Fuck you, missy, I'm a man, I've been rain-soaked before, I can take it.

So you basically walked past the Crown and Anchor, with your dry insides and soaked exterior, instead of going inside and reversing the situation.

[Brisketexan 104549]

8 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

So you basically walked past the Crown and Anchor, with your dry insides and soaked exterior, instead of going inside and reversing the situation.

I was going the other way (back towards MLK).  I’m a fool, not an idiot.

[Post Oak 20183]

2 hours ago, 686 said:

Hersh is definitely “out there” and his theory is questionable because he has only one anonymous source, etc. But it is interesting to me that: there is still no official word on who blew up the pipelines; it took skill that only a few actors could pull off; the winners and losers as a result of the action are pretty clear; whoever gave the “go-ahead” was either very confident they wouldn’t get caught / didn’t care / has very high risk tolerance.

I think those are reasons a lot of folks (myself included) think it’s very unlikely the US did it: we’re bad at keeping secrets and it would probably get leaked; Russia (and Germany?) would demand and be owed compensation; political fallout very risky; etc. That’s why Russia was such a likely actor (its their infrastructure, they can keep secrets, Putin has no fear even if it does come out). Only problem is it’s a little hard to define how Russia benefitted from them being blown up.

FWIW - Zeihan had something on this a few months back. My memory is hazy but what he said was that Sweden knows who did it but if they come out and make it public (it was Russia) then that is considered an act of war and shit gets turned up to 11. Then NATO is all in.

No one wants that. That's why there has been no formal announcement.

Some of my details may be off but that was the gist of it. 

[KYHorn 16856]

28 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

Long story short, I have no idea how we will react to all this.  I can say that if we wanted to restart colonialism, we would have done it starting 70ish years ago, and we wouldn't have stopped at a few Pacific Islands where we were more or less welcome (although, while a giant asshole, Patton was right, we should have just kept on marching to Moscow, and yes I realize war weary people wouldn't have gone for this).  So I'd be surprised if we had any true territorial aspirations.  It seems like its better policy for us to make allies that agree to have bases for us, rather than colonial conquerors.  With all that in mind, having amphibious beach head bases make little sense for us (as we have no invasion plans for anywhere); so no.  

Quite frankly, my bigger concern is with the precedent.  If Xi takes Siberia, on the one hand oh well fuck russia, right?  In the short term, sure fuck russia.  In the long term (and perhaps even immediately), what does this tell another strongman?  In the immediate chaos during this event does Modi try to retake Bangladesh, Kashmir, etc (just spit balling, I no idea if those are even stated goals of his, I don't think they are).  All we do know, is that when we fail to act in one area of the world, it inevitably leads to unintended consequence.  

I agree with Kasparov, we are already in WW3.  However, I personally look at russia as being the modern day equivalent of Italy.  Mussolini may have been the model for the fascists at the beginning, but in the end he was just a broken down stooge.  putin strikes me as this, and the real danger is Xi.  I think Ukraine is a precursor for a wider conflict.  

This would also dramatically strengthen China's claims to the arctic circle, which could lead to further tensions/conflict. Note that China has previously tried to position itself a "near-arctic" state.

[KYHorn 16856]

 

Edited February 8, 2023 by KYHorn

[Gengs1 2583]

40 minutes ago, The Dog said:

 

 

Soon?