Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[atomheartbevo 89617]

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Martial law declared in provinces bordering Russia.

Unfortunately this feels more like a power move by an unpopular president up for election fairly soon.

Unless they need martial law to call up reservists or whatever, or they want strict checkpoints to shut down vacationing Soviet Russian soldiers.  

[PilotsError 2286]

This is absolutely none of our business.   Good for Trump for staying out of it.  

[atomheartbevo 89617]

Russian embassy in Canada getting touchy. 

 

[Drew 2401]

I know people will use this to shit on Trump...but what exactly would you like him to do?  Declare War on Russia? Sanctions? Send Troops?  He'd be criticized and killed for doing any of that.

[Bama Chick 28596]

I know people will use this to shit on Trump...but what exactly would you like him to do?  Declare War on Russia? Sanctions? Send Troops?  He'd be criticized and killed for doing any of that.

Declare war? No.
Send troops? No.
Sanctions? Fuck yes AND actually enforce all the other sanctions the congress has passed that his administration has refused to enforce.

And how about he actually fucking acknowledge the bad shit Russia is doing for once and don’t mealy mouth both sides it and deflect for Putin FOR ONCE.

It won’t amount to shit but it would be nice to hear the president talk shit to the Russians when they act like Russians.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

[atomheartbevo 89617]

24 minutes ago, Drew said:

I know people will use this to shit on Trump...but what exactly would you like him to do?  Declare War on Russia? Sanctions? Send Troops?  He'd be criticized and killed for doing any of that.

We and the EU can cripple the Russian economy to the point where Putin has to back down or decide how to handle millions of pissed off Russians.  

[atomheartbevo 89617]

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

5 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

We and the EU can cripple the Russian economy to the point where Putin has to back down or decide how to handle millions of pissed off Russians.  

you have to be a little more delicate when deciding to destabilize a country that holds enough nukes to cook us all.

[Brisketexan 105036]

Or, you simply have to have a tiny bit of testicular fortitude.

We have a destroyer in the Med.  We are going to send it to the Black Sea.  Now, it can either make a courtesy stop in Odessa (in the Black Sea), OR, it can go through the Kerch strait to Berdyansk.  As to either destination, we trust that all international passages will be open to traffic.  We also trust that we can simply make a nice stop in Odessa, and there will be no need to practice our travel through international waters into the Sea of Azov.

Then send the destroyer.  Point that SOB right at the strait.  Putin will blink.  His balls aren't that big.  They just seem that way when everyone else's have atrophied.  You put a bully in his place by standing up to him.  You do so in a way that lets him save face (if he concocts some reason to re-open the strait, wonderful -- our guys make a nice stop in Odessa, turn around, and go home).  But you stand up to him.  Otherwise, the bully just gets bolder and bolder.  That's what's at stake.

Edited November 26, 2018 by Brisketexan

[atomheartbevo 89617]

1 hour ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

you have to be a little more delicate when deciding to destabilize a country that holds enough nukes to cook us all.

Using nukes makes it hard for Putin’s backers to spend their cash and move freely around the world.

He doesn’t want a nuclear war, and the moment his backers feel squeezed, he will back down.  

Hes doing this because he knows he can.  When we actually stand up to him, he will stop.

[gecko 1104]

I’m trying to find fault in brisket’s plan but can’t.....

[Parliament 14224]

Me neither.

[SquishMitten 10403]

No flaw? Y’all are overlooking Brisket’s first sentence. The person who can make that call needs to have testicular fortitude.

[InkaUtexas 25852]

maybe he can borrow Ivanka's balls for the day. 

[MadBurgerMaker 404]

6th Fleet had destroyers in the Black Sea at the beginning of the year and several times last year.  Remember the videos of Russian planes buzzing ships?

[TexasEd 8066]

8 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

There are plenty of Gavrilo Princips out there.  Thankfully they are on vacation in some town called Kyiv. I’m guessing it’s a ski resort in Scandinavia?

Eating sandwiches...

[Beau Vine 54203]

Ukraine girls really knock me out.

They leave the West behind.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

18 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Ukraine girls really knock me out.

They leave the West behind.

Do they have like great big balalaikas ?

[Brisketexan 105036]

I’ve spent a couple of hours in the Kiev airport. My observations of Ukrainians: 1) a fair amount of the women looked hot; 2) the hotter they looked, the more insufferable they looked (out of the usual ratio to hotness); 3) the duty free shop had shelves of cheap rotgut vodka;



4) we had to take a bus with sad Eastern Europeans and Armenians to board our flight. Where we stood on the tarmac in the rain (it eventually cleared);




And 5) the Ukrainian baggage handlers ransacked the shit outta my daughter’s luggage.

So, not much love for Ukraine. But fuck Russia.

[RPM 26315]

10 hours ago, SquishMitten said:

No flaw? Y’all are overlooking Brisket’s first sentence. The person who can make that call needs to have testicular fortitude.

There is a 0.0% chance Trump challenges Putin.

[atomheartbevo 89617]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46356111

Russians are parading the captured Ukrainians on TV.

That always gets people on your side.  Look how well it worked for Saddam back in 90.

[MillerEP 30446]

Finally coming to a head, intel suggests Russia is massing at the border for a possible invasion right after the holidays. I feel bad for Ukraine, they're about to be royally fucked, and nobody will probably help them militarily.:

https://www.axios.com/us-ukraine-russia-invasion-f54a180a-3b52-45f7-9774-067e28da8450.html?utm_source=join1440&utm_medium=email

The Biden administration is "deeply concerned" by new intelligence — detailed for Axios and other outlets — showing Russia stepping up preparations to invade Ukraine as soon as early 2022.

Edited December 6, 2021 by MillerEP

[Neonmoon 38129]

Deeply concerned? Shall we expect a strongly worded letter?

[InkaUtexas 25852]

Or just a tweet. 

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

22 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Deeply concerned? Shall we expect a strongly worded letter?

I'd like to pile on the guy, but this is some serious shit.  I think Russia believes we have no taste for war.  Mr. Biden can show what he's really made of here. I hope it's more than what I believe he has in his tank.

[IDIOTsavant 8482]

[Brisketexan 105036]

I'd like to pile on the guy, but this is some serious shit.  I think Russia believes we have no taste for war.  Mr. Biden can show what he's really made of here. I hope it's more than what I believe he has in his tank.

Are you ready to go to a shooting war against the Russian military over Ukraine? With all the potential consequences of same? You sure about that?

I can be bellicose and hawkish….but I’m cautious as shit when it comes to particular opponents.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Are you ready to go to a shooting war against the Russian military over Ukraine? With all the potential consequences of same? You sure about that?

I can be bellicose and hawkish….but I’m cautious as shit when it comes to particular opponents.

That assessment/ decision is above my pay grade.  I do not want war with anyone, and am not advocating it here.   I'd hope Mr. Biden is talking to his advisors, and creating some kind of response with teeth in it

We apparently have a support pact in place of some kind w/ Ukraine. Are you prepared to allow Russia to continue on this path of aggression ?  Where does it stop ?  Does China take its cue, and invade Taiwan ?  What then ?  History has a funny way of repeating itself.

[hobbes2702 13028]

Ukraine is a NATO member. We need to support them. I hope that doesn’t mean we have to send troops but we need some kind of strong support showing.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Ukraine is a NATO member. We need to support them. I hope that doesn’t mean we have to send troops but we need some kind of strong support showing.

Do we really have a choice if we're going to say we honor our commitments ? 

[hobbes2702 13028]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Do we really have a choice if we're going to say we honor our commitments ? 

Exactly. If we don’t help Ukraine protect themselves then NATO is worthless which cedes even more power to Putin and likely makes him even more aggressive towards Eastern Europe.

[MillerEP 30446]

Ukraine is not a NATO member really. They are an "enhanced opportunity partner," which is not the same thing. Back in September, we helped them address some key reforms they needed to make with their military in preparation to join NATO (see below). The Ukraine filed the paperwork to join NATO back in 2008, and Putin got spooked. He does NOT want NATO on his doorstep, so he had his buddy with the zoo at his house withdraw the paperwork in 2010, which led to the Euromaidan revolution, where they ousted him and installed a new government in 2013. Once they were stable enough they requested it again, so Putin destabilized them again in Crimea and the Donbas region to prevent them from joining back in 2014. The agreement in September (again link below) has him spooked again, and his popularity is flagging, so this is his latest stunt to revive popularity and to keep NATO at bay. Either way, the thinking is this might be a real invasion, as a last-ditch effort since all Putin's other options have failed and he has only succeeded in further pushing Ukraine towards NATO.

https://ua.usembassy.gov/joint-statement-on-the-u-s-ukraine-strategic-partnership/

Edited December 6, 2021 by MillerEP

[Brisketexan 105036]

31 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

That assessment/ decision is above my pay grade.  I do not want war with anyone, and am not advocating it here.   I'd hope Mr. Biden is talking to his advisors, and creating some kind of response with teeth in it

We apparently have a support pact in place of some kind w/ Ukraine. Are you prepared to allow Russia to continue on this path of aggression ?  Where does it stop ?  Does China take its cue, and invade Taiwan ?  What then ?  History has a funny way of repeating itself.

If Russia full-blown invades Ukraine, there certainly needs to be a response with teeth.  Full sanctions against all commerce with Russia, travel and property ownership by Russian nationals, etc., all can and should be on the table.  And backup plans to get fuel to western europe when Russia responds by cutting off the flow of gas also need to be executed.

Sending in tank divisions and launching airstrikes with American aircraft should not be one of those responses.  Direct combat between Russia and the US should be avoided.  Same with direct combat between China and the US.  

Oh, and to repeat the very important point above, Ukraine is NOT a full NATO member.  That's an important fact.  One not lost on any of the players.

Edited December 6, 2021 by Brisketexan

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

21 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

Ukraine is not a NATO member really. They are an "enhanced opportunity partner," which is not the same thing. Back in September, we helped them address some key reforms they needed to make with their military in preparation to join NATO (see below). The Ukraine filed the paperwork to join NATO back in 2008, and Putin got spooked. He does NOT want NATO on his doorstep, so he had his buddy with the zoo at his house withdraw the paperwork in 2010, which led to the Euromaidan revolution, where they ousted him and installed a new government in 2013. Once they were stable enough they requested it again, so Putin destabilized them again in Crimea and the Donbas region to prevent them from joining back in 2014. The agreement in September (again link below) has him spooked again, and his popularity is flagging, so this is his latest stunt to revive popularity and to keep NATO at bay. Either way, the thinking is this might be a real invasion, as a last-ditch effort since all Putin's other options have failed and he has only succeeded in further pushing Ukraine towards NATO.

https://ua.usembassy.gov/joint-statement-on-the-u-s-ukraine-strategic-partnership/

Thanks for the clarification. Dicey shit nonetheless.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

If Russia full-blown invades Ukraine, there certainly needs to be a response with teeth.  Full sanctions against all commerce with Russia, travel and property ownership by Russian nationals, etc., all can and should be on the table.  And backup plans to get fuel to western europe when Russia responds by cutting off the flow of gas also need to be executed.

Sending in tank divisions and launching airstrikes with American aircraft should not be one of those responses.  Direct combat between Russia and the US should be avoided.  Same with direct combat between China and the US.  

I'd like to think that would have some effect, but do you really think it will ?  China is watching, and taking notes.

[Brisketexan 105036]

2 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I'd like to think that would have some effect, but do you really think it will ?  China is watching, and taking notes.

Yep, they are.

You ready to go to full war with China over Taiwan?  What resources are you willing to send?  And which ones are you willing to lose?  And what are you going to do if tactical nukes are deployed over US fleet assets?

Talk and chest-puffing is awesome.  Actually signing the order to deploy massive amounts of US military resources into frontal combat against one of the only two powers on earth who can give us a solid fight is quite another thing.

Edited December 6, 2021 by Brisketexan

[NeverMarryAStripper 21864]

Then we might has well cede most of Europe and Asia to Russia and China and hope they go to war with each other before dividing up the Americas

[Brisketexan 105036]

Just now, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Then we might has well cede most of Europe and Asia to Russia and China and hope they go to war with each other before dividing up the Americas

The slippery slope logical fallacy does not apply here.

If Russia invades Germany, we'll be at war - there's no incremental creep here.  An attack on a NATO member state is its own thing.  Ukraine is different.  And there is a whole lot we can do in response that falls short of "send out the B-52s and aircraft carriers and fire away."  

You seem to be advocating for a path that involves full frontal warfare with Russia and/or China.  In simpler times, we'd just call that "WW III."  Are you ready for that?  Are you really?  When we start kicking Russia's ass completely, because we're fucking awesome, do you think they might get desperate and pop off a tactical nuke?  Same question for war with China in the Taiwan strait.  What do we do then?  Sit back and take it like a bitch or do we man up and sling a nuke back?  Maybe two, to show we're tougher than they are?

Game this out for me.

[Hefeweizen 5308]

1 minute ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Then we might has well cede most of Europe and Asia to Russia and China and hope they go to war with each other before dividing up the Americas

This.  Unfortunately if they think sanctions are the worst we can do, we need to retreat from all our commitments.  Either you back it up with cold steel or you are a paper Tiger.  And frankly I think we’re about ready to retreat completely right now.  I think Russia and China believe it too, which is really dangerous.  Back in the Bush/Clinton years I don’t think anyone doubted US resolve to back its alliances with swift violence if necessary.  Obama’s red line in Syria and the annexation of Crimea felt like tests that were failed.

[NeverMarryAStripper 21864]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The slippery slope logical fallacy does not apply here.

If Russia invades Germany, we'll be at war - there's no incremental creep here.  An attack on a NATO member state is its own thing.  Ukraine is different.  And there is a whole lot we can do in response that falls short of "send out the B-52s and aircraft carriers and fire away."  

You seem to be advocating for a path that involves full frontal warfare with Russia and/or China.  In simpler times, we'd just call that "WW III."  Are you ready for that?  Are you really?  When we start kicking Russia's ass completely, because we're fucking awesome, do you think they might get desperate and pop off a tactical nuke?  Same question for war with China in the Taiwan strait.  What do we do then?  Sit back and take it like a bitch or do we man up and sling a nuke back?  Maybe two, to show we're tougher than they are?

Game this out for me.

We tell them "Hey that's not nice don't do it again".  When they get to Germany we tell them "Hey this time we really mean it".

[Hefeweizen 5308]

1 minute ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

We tell them "Hey that's not nice don't do it again".  When they get to Germany we tell them "Hey this time we really mean it".

The Neville Chamberlains strategy.  They would never see that coming!

[Brisketexan 105036]

12 minutes ago, Hefeweizen said:

This.  Unfortunately if they think sanctions are the worst we can do, we need to retreat from all our commitments.  Either you back it up with cold steel or you are a paper Tiger.  And frankly I think we’re about ready to retreat completely right now.  I think Russia and China believe it too, which is really dangerous.  Back in the Bush/Clinton years I don’t think anyone doubted US resolve to back its alliances with swift violence if necessary.  Obama’s red line in Syria and the annexation of Crimea felt like tests that were failed.

Cool.  I get it.  I love the talk.  It's interesting.

There's plenty of "if we DON'T go to war, then X will happen."  Great.  Let's say I buy that.  Now, let's talk about the "if we DO go to war" options, since that's what you are advocating.

Game out either of these conflicts for me.  Show my how a ground, sea, and air war with Russia over Ukraine goes.  Show me how a war with China in the Taiwan strait goes.

Use a computer if you need to:

Edited December 6, 2021 by Brisketexan

[NeverMarryAStripper 21864]

Well I guess if our only options are not letting Russia sell us mail order brides anymore and all out thermonuclear war then the Ukraine is fucked

[idigTexas 2284]

Can't we just play a nice game of chess?

[Hefeweizen 5308]

It’s not we do go to war.  It’s having them believe we will.  Uncertainty is a great deterrent.  The US has also shown in Afghanistan (even though I think we shouldn’t have ever been there) that its commitment will waver.

 

Look, no one wants a world war.  But these are bad people who don’t give a shit about perception, treaties, or anything that isn’t backed by force.  If they think our backing is not solid, they’ll probe to find those limits.  When they’re done probing our anus may be prolapsed.

[Brisketexan 105036]

Just now, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Well I guess if our only options are not letting Russia sell us mail order brides anymore and all out thermonuclear war then the Ukraine is fucked

Nope.  False dichotomy.  Let's assume the game stops short of all out thermonuclear war.

Instead, it involves the sinking of multiple naval vessels, including one or more of our carriers -- I think the Eisenhower may be in the Med right now.  It involves Russian airstrikes on bases US aircraft are launching strikes from (say, bases in Italy and Germany).  It involves US armored divisions moving from Germany all the way into and through Ukraine, in combat much of the way because the Russians aren't going to just let them walk in.  It involves the loss of significant air assets on both sides.  It involves Kiev being subjected to significant airstrikes against military, governmental, and civilian targets.  It involves US bomber attacks on support areas within Russia -- say, Rostov.

How are you feeling about this game?

[Brisketexan 105036]

3 minutes ago, Hefeweizen said:

It’s not we do go to war.  It’s having them believe we will.  Uncertainty is a great deterrent.  The US has also shown in Afghanistan (even though I think we shouldn’t have ever been there) that its commitment will waver.

 

Look, no one wants a world war.  But these are bad people who don’t give a shit about perception, treaties, or anything that isn’t backed by force.  If they think our backing is not solid, they’ll probe to find those limits.  When they’re done probing our anus may be prolapsed.

We have established clear limits: attacks on NATO members will face full military response per NATO article 5.  That's a big difference between an attack on NATO nations and an attack on a former soviet republic that is semi-friendly with us right now.  As just one example.

Should we make movements of troops and other assets to show that we're perhaps ready and willing to throw punches?  Probably. 

That's not what I'm asking.  I'm asking if you are good with engaging in a scenario like the one I just described.

And yeah, I ask this as someone with a child living in Berlin, and not being super-thrilled about him having to flee an expanding war that expands into western Europe.  Actions have consequences.  You are proposing action.  All I'm asking is for you to detail some of the more likely potential consequences of choosing full frontal war with Russia in Ukraine.  Tell us what it looks like.

[Hefeweizen 5308]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Nope.  False dichotomy.  Let's assume the game stops short of all out thermonuclear war.

Instead, it involves the sinking of multiple naval vessels, including one or more of our carriers -- I think the Eisenhower may be in the Med right now.  It involves Russian airstrikes on bases US aircraft are launching strikes from (say, bases in Italy and Germany).  It involves US armored divisions moving from Germany all the way into and through Ukraine, in combat much of the way because the Russians aren't going to just let them walk in.  It involves the loss of significant air assets on both sides.  It involves Kiev being subjected to significant airstrikes against military, governmental, and civilian targets.  It involves US bomber attacks on support areas within Russia -- say, Rostov.

How are you feeling about this game?

I’m feeling like there’s all of a sudden a lot of finding out.  I don’t think air strikes on our bases in Europe happen without nukes flying but that’s my read of US and NATO  doctrine. I think live fire on US or NATO troops by uniformed Russians isn’t happening.  They will back down.  And then go back to shenanigans.  I’d like to park a brigade in Ukraine but I’m not in charge.

[Hefeweizen 5308]

And  FWIW, I have at least a dozen family members in Germany scattered around.  They know Russia is the enemy.  And yes, they all love having the USA in their corner as all our allies do when the chips are down.